I think you're wrong in comparing the two. That case involves something that was manufactured, not discovered. Chakrabarty developed a new bacterium, capable of breaking down crude oil for use in oil spills. He didn't just discover it, he engineered it. There's a big difference.
No reasonable person would argue that the hoods of all cars should be welded shut and only openable by the manufacturer, so why is it extreme for Stallman to make the same argument about software?
They very well might argue it, if it was practical to make a copy of said car in 20 seconds and start giving it away for free to anyone who wanted it.
... the majority of Apple users don't care about Ruby or Ruby on Rails, so there really isn't a reason for a Software Update upgrade that only.5 % (maybe less?) of their users want. For those that do care (such as myself) it's a relatively painless upgrade doing it yourself.
I am frustrated as a parent that the human body and sexuality that is natural, legal, etc...is considered too dirty for television, but antisocial violent behavior that is both illegal and unnatural is "fine for family viewing". It's a strange world we live in!
This used to puzzle me as well, but the more I thought about it, I came to realize that people don't seem to mind their kids seeing violence as much as sex because they don't actually think their kids will do any of the violent things they see, but they might actually do the sexual things. Certainly there are those who think kids do mimic the violent things they see, and for a very small subset of society, that's true. But, the vast majority of people exposed to violence rarely re-enact it. But, if kids see "natural and legal" sexual behavior, their going to think, "Hey, why can't I do that?" And therin lies the concern about sex in the media.
Beer is too expensive. Until the vendors start selling me beer at a price I want to pay, I'm going to shoplift it. I am the king after all (though I don't drink the King of Beers).
The real answer is, if you don't like the terms that the people doing the selling are giving, then you don't buy from them. Go make your own record label and compete with the bastards. But, pirating isn't the answer.
DHTML has been around for a good long while now. But most mainstream sites haven't been using it because older browsers support for it was too varied and inconsistent to make developing cross platform DHTML viable. And they didn't have access to AJAX (which is newer then DHTML and only just became supported by the default Mac OS X browser when Apple released Safari).
What is new, is that big sites like Google and Yahoo! are willing to stop supporting older browsers. And when two big sites like that stop supporting older browsers, it allows everyone else to start ignoring them as well.
DHTML is nice, but without the AJAX part of the equation, you don't get the 'desktop app' feel that everyone wants.
If you actually read TFA closely, you'll see that the software they wrote allows them to view the Diacom formatted images on the iPod photo. From the article:
Instead of the usual jpeg format, medical images are stored in a format called Diacom (Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine) so we had to create a function on the software that allowed the format to be modified so they could be visible on the iPod.
Instead of creating a security service, do a better job of creating the software in the first place, and fix the existing software that's out there.
If they really want to do it right, they shouldn't release any new products until the ones that already exist are fixed. Then, start new projects with security as the main focus. I'm sure they'd lose some business in the short term, but with billions of dollars in cash, they can afford it. In the long run, if they earn peoples respect for strong security, their business will keep growing.
I pay for my software, my movies, DVDs of TV series I love, even music CDs;
Right, but did you pay for your cell phone? You paid only a part of what the phone actually costs. They are selling it to you at a loss, so they can recoup said loss on other money making schemes, which is their right, and it's what you agreed to when you bought your phone. Perhaps we need two pricing models for phones. One that models the existing system, and one that allows you to pay the full price for a phone, but doesn't place any restrictions on it's use.
I think the atom chip people are the same people who produced the alien autopsy video shown a few years ago on Fox. At the least, it looks like they are using screen grabs from the autopsy on their home page.
Then you're asking your company to be put out of business.
Hmmm. Is Google going to be put out of business if their maps application doesn't work on every (any?) cell phone or PDA? I think not. If your content is the app itself, and that app only works with JavaScript and CSS, then so be it. You're not doing anything wrong by requiring that of your users.
I, for one, don't want to have my taxes used to incarcerate someone who doesn't pose a life or death threat to anyone else in society. Fine him up the ass, make him do community service for a decade, but there's no reason why we should throw essentially a social criminal who harmed no one but business into prison.
When someone 'harms' business, as you say, business 'harms' us by passing on the costs involved to the consumer. Besides, it'll be German tax dollars, not yours, that are used.
Listen, some sites provide functionality that "demand" cookies and and JavaScript. Without these standard, safe, time tested technologies, a lot of the web would just be, well, boring. Imagine google maps without JavaScript. Is that bad design? Should they have some how figured out how to do the same thing without JavaScript to appease the few people who want things to always be their way? I don't blame the users of my sites if they don't have cookies and JavaScript enabled, I simply don't let them in.
So, you don't buy books, magazines, CDs, DVDs, or anything else that has copyrighted material in them? If you buy a book, you're restricted (you can't re-publish it yourself or use the content in any way you want, the same goes for magazines). You must not buy art, or video games, as you're restricted with what you can do with those as well. So, what do you buy?
His point isn't that he loves DRM, it's that the record companies can pull support for online downloads altogether if they want, thus removing the very conveinent resource that iTMS is. Everytime DVD-John (or someone like him) releases something like this it makes the record companies nervous, and presumably less willing to deal with an online service as open as Apples is (if you think it's not that open, you're wrong, it could be a lot more locked down then it is, and it may get to that point if these 'hacks' keep coming). Record companies ARE evil, but that's irrellevant in the context of iTMS. iTMS is beholden to the record companies. Messing up iTMS as some sort of philisophical 'fuck you' to the record companies only hurts the end user and Apple, not the record companies.
Assuming the cancellation of Enterprise goes forward (and I hope it doesn't), what would UPN replace it with in their lineup? Some crappy teen drama? It's sure not going to be something original and daring, that's too risky for a big corporation. So, if they at least want to keep my eyes on their ad space (and I'm not suggesting they do), Enterprise is basically the only thing that will keep me watching.
All of those products you mentioned are ubiquitous now. Certainly if you asked someone directly, which is a bigger brand, "Coke or Apple?" they would likely say Coke. But, since the respondents were given a list to choose from, the "hot" ones would stick out from the ones that are omnipresent.
It's not like the user downloading the song doesn't know it's not protected by DRM. If you're intent is to have a song without any restrictions, then buy the song in a format that doesn't have any DRM (CD's for the most part). Please explain what you mean by different intentions.
...a DRM removal application for iTunes song files laden, or 'crippled' as some say,...
"Crippled" is when something isn't working the way it was intended. Songs from the iTunes Music store work the way they are supposed to. If you don't want DRM laden music, don't buy it.
they should just release it like they promised damnit.
I hardly think that when Carmack said they would GPL Q3, that that counts as a personal promise to you. If id expects people to license any future engines, then they have to respect the current license holders. If they can't make money off of their current engines, then they can't continue to produce more of them (well, maybe Carmack could, but that's beside the point). Just the fact that id does GPL their old engines should be enough for anyone. The timing of when they do it is entirely up to them.
Whether or not you use Windows Media's DRM or FairPlay, it's clear that you'll eventually need to upgrade (purchase) newer versions of the OS to continue to play your music, whether if it's subscribed (borrowed) or owned outright (iTMS). How do you figure? Apple can't magically change my music files, or my installed version of iTunes. I may need to upgrade the OS to get new versions of the iTunes music store to work, but the file format of my existing music isn't changing by itself. If I keep my current version of my OS and iTunes, I'll be able to play my existing files as long as I want. I can also (and do) burn them onto CD as.aiff files, so I can play them on any machine that can read a normal music CD.
As for the fake IDs - again, the terrorists used their original IDs. Nothing fake to spot there...
Precisely why they ask for id's to be shown before boarding a plane! If they hadn't, the FBI, CIA, etc... would have had a much harder job of finding out who was responsible. And if the terrorists had used fake id's, the police would at least have pictures of the bad guys to use as a catalyst for their investigation.
Well, if you RTFA, you'd see that the photo shoot was in the studio they were recording in. So, it's not too hard to imagine they would have a version of the album hanging around on disc.
Well, it only seems redundant if you're the one controlling it. If you're not the U.S., then you might be concerned that the U.S.'s GPS system may not always be available to you.
Slashdot Mirror
I think you're wrong in comparing the two. That case involves something that was manufactured, not discovered. Chakrabarty developed a new bacterium, capable of breaking down crude oil for use in oil spills. He didn't just discover it, he engineered it. There's a big difference.
They very well might argue it, if it was practical to make a copy of said car in 20 seconds and start giving it away for free to anyone who wanted it.
... the majority of Apple users don't care about Ruby or Ruby on Rails, so there really isn't a reason for a Software Update upgrade that only .5 % (maybe less?) of their users want. For those that do care (such as myself) it's a relatively painless upgrade doing it yourself.
This used to puzzle me as well, but the more I thought about it, I came to realize that people don't seem to mind their kids seeing violence as much as sex because they don't actually think their kids will do any of the violent things they see, but they might actually do the sexual things. Certainly there are those who think kids do mimic the violent things they see, and for a very small subset of society, that's true. But, the vast majority of people exposed to violence rarely re-enact it. But, if kids see "natural and legal" sexual behavior, their going to think, "Hey, why can't I do that?" And therin lies the concern about sex in the media.
Beer is too expensive. Until the vendors start selling me beer at a price I want to pay, I'm going to shoplift it. I am the king after all (though I don't drink the King of Beers).
The real answer is, if you don't like the terms that the people doing the selling are giving, then you don't buy from them. Go make your own record label and compete with the bastards. But, pirating isn't the answer.
DHTML has been around for a good long while now. But most mainstream sites haven't been using it because older browsers support for it was too varied and inconsistent to make developing cross platform DHTML viable. And they didn't have access to AJAX (which is newer then DHTML and only just became supported by the default Mac OS X browser when Apple released Safari).
What is new, is that big sites like Google and Yahoo! are willing to stop supporting older browsers. And when two big sites like that stop supporting older browsers, it allows everyone else to start ignoring them as well.
DHTML is nice, but without the AJAX part of the equation, you don't get the 'desktop app' feel that everyone wants.
If you actually read TFA closely, you'll see that the software they wrote allows them to view the Diacom formatted images on the iPod photo. From the article:
Instead of the usual jpeg format, medical images are stored in a format called Diacom (Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine) so we had to create a function on the software that allowed the format to be modified so they could be visible on the iPod.
Instead of creating a security service, do a better job of creating the software in the first place, and fix the existing software that's out there.
If they really want to do it right, they shouldn't release any new products until the ones that already exist are fixed. Then, start new projects with security as the main focus. I'm sure they'd lose some business in the short term, but with billions of dollars in cash, they can afford it. In the long run, if they earn peoples respect for strong security, their business will keep growing.
Right, but did you pay for your cell phone? You paid only a part of what the phone actually costs. They are selling it to you at a loss, so they can recoup said loss on other money making schemes, which is their right, and it's what you agreed to when you bought your phone. Perhaps we need two pricing models for phones. One that models the existing system, and one that allows you to pay the full price for a phone, but doesn't place any restrictions on it's use.
I think the atom chip people are the same people who produced the alien autopsy video shown a few years ago on Fox. At the least, it looks like they are using screen grabs from the autopsy on their home page.
Then you're asking your company to be put out of business.
Hmmm. Is Google going to be put out of business if their maps application doesn't work on every (any?) cell phone or PDA? I think not. If your content is the app itself, and that app only works with JavaScript and CSS, then so be it. You're not doing anything wrong by requiring that of your users.
I, for one, don't want to have my taxes used to incarcerate someone who doesn't pose a life or death threat to anyone else in society. Fine him up the ass, make him do community service for a decade, but there's no reason why we should throw essentially a social criminal who harmed no one but business into prison.
When someone 'harms' business, as you say, business 'harms' us by passing on the costs involved to the consumer. Besides, it'll be German tax dollars, not yours, that are used.
Listen, some sites provide functionality that "demand" cookies and and JavaScript. Without these standard, safe, time tested technologies, a lot of the web would just be, well, boring. Imagine google maps without JavaScript. Is that bad design? Should they have some how figured out how to do the same thing without JavaScript to appease the few people who want things to always be their way? I don't blame the users of my sites if they don't have cookies and JavaScript enabled, I simply don't let them in.
So, you don't buy books, magazines, CDs, DVDs, or anything else that has copyrighted material in them? If you buy a book, you're restricted (you can't re-publish it yourself or use the content in any way you want, the same goes for magazines). You must not buy art, or video games, as you're restricted with what you can do with those as well. So, what do you buy?
His point isn't that he loves DRM, it's that the record companies can pull support for online downloads altogether if they want, thus removing the very conveinent resource that iTMS is. Everytime DVD-John (or someone like him) releases something like this it makes the record companies nervous, and presumably less willing to deal with an online service as open as Apples is (if you think it's not that open, you're wrong, it could be a lot more locked down then it is, and it may get to that point if these 'hacks' keep coming). Record companies ARE evil, but that's irrellevant in the context of iTMS. iTMS is beholden to the record companies. Messing up iTMS as some sort of philisophical 'fuck you' to the record companies only hurts the end user and Apple, not the record companies.
Assuming the cancellation of Enterprise goes forward (and I hope it doesn't), what would UPN replace it with in their lineup? Some crappy teen drama? It's sure not going to be something original and daring, that's too risky for a big corporation. So, if they at least want to keep my eyes on their ad space (and I'm not suggesting they do), Enterprise is basically the only thing that will keep me watching.
All of those products you mentioned are ubiquitous now. Certainly if you asked someone directly, which is a bigger brand, "Coke or Apple?" they would likely say Coke. But, since the respondents were given a list to choose from, the "hot" ones would stick out from the ones that are omnipresent.
It's not like the user downloading the song doesn't know it's not protected by DRM. If you're intent is to have a song without any restrictions, then buy the song in a format that doesn't have any DRM (CD's for the most part). Please explain what you mean by different intentions.
...a DRM removal application for iTunes song files laden, or 'crippled' as some say,...
"Crippled" is when something isn't working the way it was intended. Songs from the iTunes Music store work the way they are supposed to. If you don't want DRM laden music, don't buy it.
Neither shows needed this kind of nonsense to shore them up for another handful of weary episodes.
I seem to remember Scotty and Bones on TNG at different points. How is that different?
they should just release it like they promised damnit.
I hardly think that when Carmack said they would GPL Q3, that that counts as a personal promise to you. If id expects people to license any future engines, then they have to respect the current license holders. If they can't make money off of their current engines, then they can't continue to produce more of them (well, maybe Carmack could, but that's beside the point). Just the fact that id does GPL their old engines should be enough for anyone. The timing of when they do it is entirely up to them.
Whether or not you use Windows Media's DRM or FairPlay, it's clear that you'll eventually need to upgrade (purchase) newer versions of the OS to continue to play your music, whether if it's subscribed (borrowed) or owned outright (iTMS). .aiff files, so I can play them on any machine that can read a normal music CD.
How do you figure? Apple can't magically change my music files, or my installed version of iTunes. I may need to upgrade the OS to get new versions of the iTunes music store to work, but the file format of my existing music isn't changing by itself. If I keep my current version of my OS and iTunes, I'll be able to play my existing files as long as I want. I can also (and do) burn them onto CD as
As for the fake IDs - again, the terrorists used their original IDs. Nothing fake to spot there...
Precisely why they ask for id's to be shown before boarding a plane! If they hadn't, the FBI, CIA, etc... would have had a much harder job of finding out who was responsible. And if the terrorists had used fake id's, the police would at least have pictures of the bad guys to use as a catalyst for their investigation.
Well, if you RTFA, you'd see that the photo shoot was in the studio they were recording in. So, it's not too hard to imagine they would have a version of the album hanging around on disc.
Well, it only seems redundant if you're the one controlling it. If you're not the U.S., then you might be concerned that the U.S.'s GPS system may not always be available to you.