It was a great time. The team I was on placed fourth at the competition (we would say "We're the fourth best team in the free world.") The Russians weren't participating then, though a team from Switzerland did. Along with a team from Israel if I remember right.
When I was the alternate the team placed second - it's kinda depressing to know that the team did better without me:-(
They are not buying WMAs, so that's not good enough.
Actually, they are.
DVDs don't really sell as well as they could because of DRM.
Really? Done a study to verify that?
That's what people expect from things they buy and they really won't accept less.
LOL! The Apple iTunes store has sold over ONE BILLION songs in less than three years. So, on average, over 28 million times a month people have accepted less. And that's just iTunes, that doesn't count other online song retailers. You might want to rethink the accuracy of your statement.
What you're really saying is that YOU won't accept less. That's a totally different thing.
In the strictest sense, you're correct. In the realistic sense of this conversation you're not. You don't watch code on your TV except in a Matrix movie. You don't listen to code on your MP3 player.
Notice that uncontrolled internet lately, where's the content shortage?
I've noticed a shortage of GOOD content of the kind I described above.
DRM won't work and only systems and artists who avoid it will profit and grow. Go visit the links I provided and tell me what content you are still lacking.
People are buying BILLIONS of dollars of DRM protected content TODAY. So, it works well enough for most people (even though many complain about it).
why we shouldn't be trying to use Linux as leverage against people who are trying to impose DRM.
Because Linux doesn't provide content, and as one other person already posted, that's what people want.
What do people who controll content really have to offer us that we somehow can't manage without?
Nothing. However, imagine your life with no content: little to no movies, no TV, little music, very few magazines, very few books. That's a life without content. You can manage in that environment, but most people wouldn't want to.
People do want content. And content creators want to be compensated for the creation of content. They don't want leeches like the guy I just responded to, who knows he's downloading stuff illegally and doesn't care, to be able to do that with their content.
If people want content and content providers don't make that content available on Linux, then people won't use Linux. You probably don't care about that - most Slashdotters don't. But some people do care.
How do they ensure that none of that source doesn't leak into MS products?
I don't know this, but I would imagine they use software from either Blackduck or Palamida. While these are not foolproof, they are good at finding tainting from open source.
Some people want their creations to be freely available to all who wish to use them. Others want to restrict the use of their creations to those that have paid to use them. Both groups should be able to do what they want.
If someone creates something they should have the right to determine who gets to use what they created and under what terms.
For some reason, I think he's trying to spin this. A year from now, AT&T will be offering 6 Mbps and saying what a great thing it is and how everyone needs to use it to truly appreciate it.
I can say that I certainly noticed the difference when I upgraded my DSL service.
The Republican will win every time.
Now, Florida or Ohio on the other hand, Diebold has reason to rig elections in those places!
TERRIBLE name for the article!
on
Why Windows is Slow
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
The NYT titled the article "Why Windows is Slow" - it should have been titled "Why Microsoft is Slow". The article talks about the slow delivery of new versions of Windows relative to Apple deliveries of Darwin. It's got nothing to do with the performance of Windows itself.
Slashdot Mirror
Putting together a distro isn't that hard. Supporting it the way Novell and Red Hat do is hard. That's what Oracle would need to do.
The above is very compelling for users. Thus, improving the user experience in that environment is also compelling.
It was a great time. The team I was on placed fourth at the competition (we would say "We're the fourth best team in the free world.") The Russians weren't participating then, though a team from Switzerland did. Along with a team from Israel if I remember right. When I was the alternate the team placed second - it's kinda depressing to know that the team did better without me :-(
Actually, they are.
DVDs don't really sell as well as they could because of DRM.
Really? Done a study to verify that?
That's what people expect from things they buy and they really won't accept less.
LOL! The Apple iTunes store has sold over ONE BILLION songs in less than three years. So, on average, over 28 million times a month people have accepted less. And that's just iTunes, that doesn't count other online song retailers. You might want to rethink the accuracy of your statement.
What you're really saying is that YOU won't accept less. That's a totally different thing.
Hello! Think McFly, think.
In the strictest sense, you're correct. In the realistic sense of this conversation you're not. You don't watch code on your TV except in a Matrix movie. You don't listen to code on your MP3 player.
Notice that uncontrolled internet lately, where's the content shortage?
I've noticed a shortage of GOOD content of the kind I described above.
People are buying BILLIONS of dollars of DRM protected content TODAY. So, it works well enough for most people (even though many complain about it).
So, are you saying you believe that both violate the Constitution or just DMCA?
Because Linux doesn't provide content, and as one other person already posted, that's what people want.
What do people who controll content really have to offer us that we somehow can't manage without?
Nothing. However, imagine your life with no content: little to no movies, no TV, little music, very few magazines, very few books. That's a life without content. You can manage in that environment, but most people wouldn't want to.
Just for a few more laughs, precisely what part of the Constitution does DRM violate?
Keep in mind, that the Constitution restricts government behavior, not private behavior...
If people want content and content providers don't make that content available on Linux, then people won't use Linux. You probably don't care about that - most Slashdotters don't. But some people do care.
I sense my karma going down
I'll get mod'd down for this, but: It's people like you that make DRM necessary.
No, it isn't. The definition of "open standards" in the bill is all "open" and no "standards."
The bill's definition of "open standards" is laughable. It's all "open" and no "standards."
I don't know this, but I would imagine they use software from either Blackduck or Palamida. While these are not foolproof, they are good at finding tainting from open source.
People have every right to be compensated for their work. Do you work for free? Perhaps your parents support you?
If it's God's will then why pray? Won't His will always be done?
One of my favorite quotes:
--- Cory Doctorow at the 2005 European OSCON Conference
Free (as in freedom) content and DRM are conflicted.
Open source software and free software are NOT the same thing, though many people do conflate the two.
Some people want their creations to be freely available to all who wish to use them. Others want to restrict the use of their creations to those that have paid to use them. Both groups should be able to do what they want.
If someone creates something they should have the right to determine who gets to use what they created and under what terms.
Well DUH!
Most content providers create the content that they create in the expectation that they will be compensated for the use of their creations.
I can say that I certainly noticed the difference when I upgraded my DSL service.
The Republican will win every time. Now, Florida or Ohio on the other hand, Diebold has reason to rig elections in those places!
The NYT titled the article "Why Windows is Slow" - it should have been titled "Why Microsoft is Slow". The article talks about the slow delivery of new versions of Windows relative to Apple deliveries of Darwin. It's got nothing to do with the performance of Windows itself.
Google gives away 2 GB with a Gmail account, but only 100 MB for web access. Why the difference?
If that's true then it's GOOD for those software companies. They get to sell upgrades for their software thanks to Microsoft.