Like drug use, they're not trying to stop it. A whole lot of people would go broke if they succeeded. They just want to control it, like who can distibute, etc.
They could always use what should have been the title of Star Trek 6(kinda) "Episode III - The Apology"
Re:The whole streaming audio/video field's gone cr
on
Real Problems
·
· Score: 1
Who benefits from any of this?...What will happen in 20 years when someone needs to open a.wma file, but.wma has been extinct for a dozen years, and the only program that will open it will be Foobleblatz(R) AudioMasher Pro(TM), a pro-level audio editing tool "with support for over 500 current and previous codecs and encoding formats", for the equivalent of $999.95 2004 dollars?...What the fuck is our problem?
These are rhetorical questions...right?
Re:DRM shouldn't matter for Public Radio!
on
Real Problems
·
· Score: 1
NPR should do everyone a service (that's why they're around, to do a public service) and just give us the mp3's/oggs.
NPR operates like a business with the gov't as its client. More "value" can be applied to its product meaning that they can ask for more money. Here again, the value is created by keeping the product scarce.
Re:idiotic that mp3 is not used...
on
Real Problems
·
· Score: 1
The person or company with the contract to print the flyers might get pissed because you're horning in on their business. They don't want you to get the next contract with said designer. It's the publishers who don't like "unauthorized" copying. They want it all to themselves.
Where fly-by-wire has been associated with accidents, it has been because of overconfidence by the pilot.
You might want to read the links I provided here. Ganted, they were "minor" incidents, but people have died, and one of the accidents was caused by a bad chip. I know a lot of people would disagree, but I don't think fly-by-wire is quite ready for prime time. Maybe the 777 can prove otherwise.
The entire idea of DRM is, on the face of it, futile.
Somebody's benefiting from it. It's just not you or me. Even though their days are numbered(I hope), DRM, DMCA, etc. is buying the old style publishers some time. Even if time isn't on their side, the law is, unfortunately. When you "follow the money", you will know why these things exist, and it's not as stupid as it looks. Even the dumbest laws have a beneficiary somewhere.
I think the Boeing 777 is the only other fly-by-wire airliner, and nobody has wrecked one yet. They are kind of new still. As far as autopilots for cars are concerned, I think they should complete the process and put the things in elevated mag lev tubes. That would protect them from the weather, animals, and the drunks in their pick up trucks trying to beat the train to the crossing.
You really had me up until the license thing. That would be a political mess, with arbitrary revocations for violating some obscure rule that's only valid in California for example. Sorry guy, until somebody drives the internet across the median and rams it into a "station wagon full of nuns", we must never let anybody decide who gets access or not. I do agree however that everything went to hell when AOL'ers got access:-)
...put the spammers in jail for computer crime, and the problem goes away.
Somebody is not learning the lessons of the "failed" drug war. We won't fix anything by locking people up for such petty crimes. Get off the jail thing. It's so middle ages. If you want to make a dent in spamming, just take away their property(including house and car, in fact the food out of the fridge and their clothes too) and empty their bank accounts. Then, if you want to arrest him, get him for vagrancy or public nudity:-)
A lot of foreign aid is tied up with a lot of "Halliburton" type sweetheart deals, where the country has to buy American goods (arms?) This doesn't apply to Israel, of course. I saw this what I consider a funny quote from a right wing rag, "The United States gives out $13.3 billion in direct foreign aid annually. The vast majority of these recipients express animosity toward the United States in state-sponsored media, and routinely vote against the U.S. in international forums." As I've said before, all this means nothing as long as these countries "buy American". Also, considering what a tiny percentage of their overall economy goes to foreign aid, I'd hardly call it generous. I'm not saying that America is any worse than anybody else, but I know for a fact that they are certainly no better either
If it were implemented by a gov't,(a prohibition against doing business with them, like the Cuba thing) I suppose you would be right. I'm more interested in seeing individual people simply turning their back. I think the word is "shunning". It can be extremely effective. It would also work against everyday crime.
The only reason it hasn't already happened is because this pesky internet thing is here and they can't stop it and moreso, more and more people are moving onto the internet and getting their info from alternative sources.
You're probably right. I sure hope you are. One night FOX was speculating whether or not there should be "some kind of control" against "liberal" sites like moveon.org, etc. Obviously they're getting nervous. The gov't is trying to pass some new anti-pirate law, linking P2P with kiddy porn in order to whip up the troops. (old story, I know, but some house sub-committe(sp) just "passed" some new copyright resolution) My point is that they are already worried about the net.
Last time I checked the numbers, it was roughly half.(about 17,000 per year) And that involved alcohol ONLY, not other drugs. Unfortunately, usually it's not the damn drunk that gets killed. Excuse my "french", but this is a bit of a touchy subject with me.
Slashdot Mirror
the audio channel that many airlines use to let passengers listen in on crew conversations during flight, Channel 9's creators state the following...
Damn...Here I was thinking I'll get to see some Cubs games on MSN.
No laws are going to stop it.
Like drug use, they're not trying to stop it. A whole lot of people would go broke if they succeeded. They just want to control it, like who can distibute, etc.
The title of the movie has yet to be released.
They could always use what should have been the title of Star Trek 6(kinda) "Episode III - The Apology"
Who benefits from any of this?...What will happen in 20 years when someone needs to open a .wma file, but .wma has been extinct for a dozen years, and the only program that will open it will be Foobleblatz(R) AudioMasher Pro(TM), a pro-level audio editing tool "with support for over 500 current and previous codecs and encoding formats", for the equivalent of $999.95 2004 dollars? ...What the fuck is our problem?
These are rhetorical questions...right?
NPR should do everyone a service (that's why they're around, to do a public service) and just give us the mp3's/oggs.
NPR operates like a business with the gov't as its client. More "value" can be applied to its product meaning that they can ask for more money. Here again, the value is created by keeping the product scarce.
The person or company with the contract to print the flyers might get pissed because you're horning in on their business. They don't want you to get the next contract with said designer. It's the publishers who don't like "unauthorized" copying. They want it all to themselves.
I found a kind of classic media player available on C:\Archivos de programa\Windows Media Player\mplayer2.exe. Will that work? Looks like 6.4
Where fly-by-wire has been associated with accidents, it has been because of overconfidence by the pilot.
You might want to read the links I provided here. Ganted, they were "minor" incidents, but people have died, and one of the accidents was caused by a bad chip. I know a lot of people would disagree, but I don't think fly-by-wire is quite ready for prime time. Maybe the 777 can prove otherwise.
The entire idea of DRM is, on the face of it, futile.
Somebody's benefiting from it. It's just not you or me. Even though their days are numbered(I hope), DRM, DMCA, etc. is buying the old style publishers some time. Even if time isn't on their side, the law is, unfortunately. When you "follow the money", you will know why these things exist, and it's not as stupid as it looks. Even the dumbest laws have a beneficiary somewhere.
...maybe the honest people will be taxed a little less.
How do you spell it again? Gullible or gullable? Something like that.
I think the Boeing 777 is the only other fly-by-wire airliner, and nobody has wrecked one yet. They are kind of new still. As far as autopilots for cars are concerned, I think they should complete the process and put the things in elevated mag lev tubes. That would protect them from the weather, animals, and the drunks in their pick up trucks trying to beat the train to the crossing.
You really had me up until the license thing. That would be a political mess, with arbitrary revocations for violating some obscure rule that's only valid in California for example. Sorry guy, until somebody drives the internet across the median and rams it into a "station wagon full of nuns", we must never let anybody decide who gets access or not. I do agree however that everything went to hell when AOL'ers got access:-)
"Where do you want to go today?"
If it detects your age and automatically turns off the blinker if you're older than say 65, it's ok with me.
Sure, aeroplanes have been doing it for years - changing public opinion is going to be difficult.
With good reason
Would putting them in jail be any less of a violation? My point is that jail is wrong. But evidently, revenge is sweet.
...put the spammers in jail for computer crime, and the problem goes away.
Somebody is not learning the lessons of the "failed" drug war. We won't fix anything by locking people up for such petty crimes. Get off the jail thing. It's so middle ages. If you want to make a dent in spamming, just take away their property(including house and car, in fact the food out of the fridge and their clothes too) and empty their bank accounts. Then, if you want to arrest him, get him for vagrancy or public nudity:-)
A lot of foreign aid is tied up with a lot of "Halliburton" type sweetheart deals, where the country has to buy American goods (arms?) This doesn't apply to Israel, of course. I saw this what I consider a funny quote from a right wing rag, "The United States gives out $13.3 billion in direct foreign aid annually. The vast majority of these recipients express animosity toward the United States in state-sponsored media, and routinely vote against the U.S. in international forums." As I've said before, all this means nothing as long as these countries "buy American". Also, considering what a tiny percentage of their overall economy goes to foreign aid, I'd hardly call it generous. I'm not saying that America is any worse than anybody else, but I know for a fact that they are certainly no better either
With one beat every four months, it's going to be one looooonnnngg solo
How 'bout Freedonia?
Please don't lump all Americans into one basket...
No...just the American voter. Why won't they even nominate a decent person into one party or the other?
Oh yeah, Kerry is much better.
...the brits have the same liar...
:-)
I know better than that. Kerry is just Bush "lite". American politics speak volumes about its people. That apllies to all "democratic" countries.
I kind of believe that tha Americans are just doing Britain's dirty work for them. Many American men still wake up "standing for the queen"
Wait, that's economic sanctions.
If it were implemented by a gov't,(a prohibition against doing business with them, like the Cuba thing) I suppose you would be right. I'm more interested in seeing individual people simply turning their back. I think the word is "shunning". It can be extremely effective. It would also work against everyday crime.
The only reason it hasn't already happened is because this pesky internet thing is here and they can't stop it and moreso, more and more people are moving onto the internet and getting their info from alternative sources.
You're probably right. I sure hope you are. One night FOX was speculating whether or not there should be "some kind of control" against "liberal" sites like moveon.org, etc. Obviously they're getting nervous. The gov't is trying to pass some new anti-pirate law, linking P2P with kiddy porn in order to whip up the troops. (old story, I know, but some house sub-committe(sp) just "passed" some new copyright resolution) My point is that they are already worried about the net.
Last time I checked the numbers, it was roughly half.(about 17,000 per year) And that involved alcohol ONLY, not other drugs. Unfortunately, usually it's not the damn drunk that gets killed. Excuse my "french", but this is a bit of a touchy subject with me.