I have always had problem (even when my friends burn things for me). I did have an Orbitron (or some small name brand that I got for free) that I never had any problems (still could not play -R's), but it never skipped. This Sony one pauses about once every movie I play. I usually have to tap the FF button (and then hit the play). It is more annoying, because if I do not hit the FF button within 30 seconds I have to eject and reinsert the disc. I think something in general is wrong with the Sony player BUT I know that I have had problems with -R's in friends' players as well.
but it will have "new features"...they are just going to add one or two new features and rename a bunch of old ones to make them seem new. It's called market speak i.e. w3 p0wn3d y0u
I agree price fixing is wrong and they should be punished for it. But price fixing is very far from a company setting their own price requirement. The grandparent does want the market to set the price - I am saying that it should be the IP's owners decision, not anyone elses decision, to set the price. If the IP holder wants to let the market determine the price - they can do so. Though i am willing to bet that the price will be zero no matter who the artist is. If people have the option they will not only want it for free, but will expect someone to pay them to take it. For the market set price to work it would have to be a fair market in BOTH directions and human nature will not allow that. Though in a way the market does set the price. If a CD is listed as 15 bucks and nobody buys it, the price of the CD drops. Once people start to buy it the price stays steady. Supply and demand have and do control prices. They know that all of us geeks want to have every flavor of star wars so they set the price high:D
So if I spend millions of dollars producing a non-tangeable product I should not be entitled to the same protection of a company spending millions of dollars producing a tangeable product? One of the reasons, presumeably, because the reproduction costs are negligeable?
Sorry, but I refuse to buy those set of "steak knives". I do not think we would see such great software products that we have today (i.e. counterstrike) if not for copyright protection well because no company would invest millions knowing that they would not see that money back (and a profit).
As for what people "figured" out - I think it is more that some people are trying to make IP not property. I think that is wrong. I think if someone comes up with IP they should have a right to choose to profit from it or not based on their notion. I guess we can discuss this in circles and it is two differing opinions.
I tend to stick with the same system components for compatability. I might switch from sony eventually, but I would need to do a total overhaul of my stereo system (which would run me thousands as my next system may be the Bose lifestyle)
Then its a phillips relabeled as sony. With the exception of my Bose speakers, I only buy Sony products for my H.E. system. I am pretty sure it is the SONY SLV D500 DVD VCR combo. Though according to one website, it is supposed to support -R -RW but does NOT support +r +rw (which I utilize all the time).
Really? With the exception of price (and it is not that much) I have had way more success with +R's then -R's. In fact I could never get the -R to work properly on my dvd player. I forget the exact model, but I have a DVD/VCR sony combo player. It plays VCD's also (about two years old). I have never been able to get a -R to play on it and I use the same process to burn to a -R that I do to my +R's
And a hack will be made, a firmware update released and in the end we will be back to what we are doing today. Not to mention this will take a LOT of time until it comes out and becomes mainstream (how many people are going to change their dvd players/recorders....meaning they won't be buying this new media format for a while)
But whose choice is that to make? Your choice (or the peoples)? What gives you the right to decide how much Brittney Spears and her organizations want to charge for their own creation? Or should we let the gov't choose the price? With available tech people steal the material. If people are legally allowed to steal the material (now it is not stealing, it is just taking for free) - they will do so. In all honesty - how many people are going to pay for something, when they can get it for free legally? Hell how many people out there pay for something when they can take it illegally with little risk of capture?
It is not our property - we did not make it, we have ZERO say. It is like if I knit a sweater. I can charge nothing for it(give it away), I can charge 5 bucks or I can charge 5,000 bucks. My choice. Your choice is to pay or not pay for it. If i see that people are not buying my sweaters I can either reduce the price or leave it as is. Again I have a choice to sell at the price that I want to sell, you have the choice to buy it or not. I can't see why this concept is so hard to grasp?
Please note I am not trying to incite you to anger, I am just trying to figure out why people have a problem with someone setting a price that they want on their property.
It is a legitimate concern. Some people/organizations want to create their product for profit (nothing wrong here). Put it this way - we know games like Doom 3, Halo 2, etc are multi-million dollar games and some of the most popular. How is the open source gaming industry doing? Except for a few games I played on Linux Redhat (came with it) that looked remarkably like other games I have played (one looked like Atari Asteroids) I didn't see anything there too original...none of them were spectacular. Though the Penguin body-sled game was pretty neat.
In your second paragraph you discuss how (generally) artists do not have the infrastructure or the contacts needed in this global industry...well so they are going to the RIAA/MPAA organizations and signing a contract - yes the organizations may get a majority of the profit - but it doesn't seem like the artists are doing too bad. As long as an artist can get one really good hit song out there they are sure to make a ton of cash. It's a trade off. What these guys are saying "You bring the talent we supply the capital taking a risk in you. If you do poorly you lose time but get some money, if you do great you get rich, we get richer. If you do not like the deal we are offering, do it on your own, nobody is stopping you."
The only thing I disagree about the RIAA/MPAA is their price fixing (notice cd/dvd sale prices never drop, even though in an elastic market it should); and possibly their thing about backing up cd/dvd's (though I understand their reasoning, since many people are stealing this material not just simply backing up material).
One of my econ classes i believe. Something about wealth distribution...not that it really works out as seen in Communist Russia, there were rich and poor and under an ideal communisim/socialism model everyone would be equal.
Yea well if you had to deal with the paparatzi trying to catch any kind of lewd, crude or embarassing video/audio of you, or your family on a 24/7 basis you would probably also have a major cocaine habit right? Not exactly fair to insinuate that all artists are utilizing drugs; actually its down right liabel (sp?).
Actually you are trying to separate communism and socialism into two distinct parts. While in theory we can talk about them as two distinct parts - the reality of it is that they work together. Kind of hard to have one without the other. Capitalism doesn't work to well with communism.
What is the incentive for a person to spend time and money to create a work if it will not be shared with the public (for profit probably)? Again, without copyright this person has no legal basis for recouping payment. So why would someone devot a lot of time and receive nothing (especially if it is their form of income)?
Not every well known artist utilizes the major labels and is subject to their reign (Metallica produces under their own label). While it is tough, and rare it does happen. Also, I am sure there are many small time bands who have their stuff distributed to a local area. It may be limited - but it does happen.
Just because something grants an exclusive right does not make it communist, in fact by forcing it to be open and free for the public you are saying you should share it - which is more communist then capitalist. What are these incentives that you are speaking of? Other then the right of exclusitivity what other benefit does the copyright holder get?
Who is pouring the millions of dollars into these peoples pockets? Is it the gov't or is it us the people? If it is the gov't, I did not realize they were paying Metallica's bills; if it is the people - well then apparantly a lot of people out there feel the artists should get paid (I have no problem with this - considering they have to deal with a LOT of crap we do not).
Is an artist truely forced to sell under the RIAA/MPAA? (with the exception of artists that accept funding from these organizations). If artists can sell their products under a different organization (or none at all) then this is not a monopoly. If the RIAA/MPAA is the best bet for an artist well that is the fault of those who are not willing to invest to compete. For example: Brittney Spears with the same marketing/advertising will do just as well no matter if she is working with the RIAA or the joeschmoe group.
Except this was a helicopter carrying 2-4 people. Not to mention, the height that a passenger jet (or any jet) flies, the speed that it moves, and the potentcy of the laser pointer --- you know how difficult it is to sucessfully hit a moving jet with a laser pointer? Here is a suggestion, next time a fruit-fly is buzzing around - try shining a laser pointer at it - see how sucessful you are - thats about what you would have to do to hit a plane that is moving hundreds of miles an hour and that is so far away from you.
you can sit 25 years in jail for pointing a laser pointer at a helicopter
And for murder can get out in under 5 years.
Yea our laws at work. Does someone ever review some of the laws and just make a flat out decision that some of the penalties are just assinine (in both directions).
leap year - unless you want to have a HUGE team of people go out every four years to reset all of the stop lights in sync on a given day.
Failsafes are, typically, redundent versions of the primary system...if the primary system is flawed chances are the failesafe is flawed too. I don't think the original designers said "lets program the primary system with this dating system that might cause errors in the year 2000, but lets program the secondary system without this flaw."
LogoWriter...Apple IIe...brings a tear to my eye thinking about it. Ashame I went to an under funded urban public school so that all stopped after 6th grade. I had to pick it up on my own at home, and then in 11th and 12th did independent study with computers where I got to play with Mozilla:D
Ahhh Oregan Trail...the best game ever...I think i always picked the carpenter
Slashdot Mirror
Hmm some moron modded the parent in the WRONG direction, mod him funny damn you cause it was funny :)
Go ahead, mod me down - i dare ya; i surf at +8 platinum edition
I have always had problem (even when my friends burn things for me). I did have an Orbitron (or some small name brand that I got for free) that I never had any problems (still could not play -R's), but it never skipped. This Sony one pauses about once every movie I play. I usually have to tap the FF button (and then hit the play). It is more annoying, because if I do not hit the FF button within 30 seconds I have to eject and reinsert the disc. I think something in general is wrong with the Sony player BUT I know that I have had problems with -R's in friends' players as well.
copy, paste save notes for future reference...
Thanks!!
-A
but it will have "new features"...they are just going to add one or two new features and rename a bunch of old ones to make them seem new. It's called market speak i.e. w3 p0wn3d y0u
If I wait for version 27.6.2.1.3 (just 15 versions shy of the current Star wars set) can i have my license back?
I agree price fixing is wrong and they should be punished for it. But price fixing is very far from a company setting their own price requirement. The grandparent does want the market to set the price - I am saying that it should be the IP's owners decision, not anyone elses decision, to set the price. If the IP holder wants to let the market determine the price - they can do so. Though i am willing to bet that the price will be zero no matter who the artist is. If people have the option they will not only want it for free, but will expect someone to pay them to take it. For the market set price to work it would have to be a fair market in BOTH directions and human nature will not allow that. Though in a way the market does set the price. If a CD is listed as 15 bucks and nobody buys it, the price of the CD drops. Once people start to buy it the price stays steady. Supply and demand have and do control prices. They know that all of us geeks want to have every flavor of star wars so they set the price high :D
So if I spend millions of dollars producing a non-tangeable product I should not be entitled to the same protection of a company spending millions of dollars producing a tangeable product? One of the reasons, presumeably, because the reproduction costs are negligeable?
Sorry, but I refuse to buy those set of "steak knives". I do not think we would see such great software products that we have today (i.e. counterstrike) if not for copyright protection well because no company would invest millions knowing that they would not see that money back (and a profit).
As for what people "figured" out - I think it is more that some people are trying to make IP not property. I think that is wrong. I think if someone comes up with IP they should have a right to choose to profit from it or not based on their notion. I guess we can discuss this in circles and it is two differing opinions.
I tend to stick with the same system components for compatability. I might switch from sony eventually, but I would need to do a total overhaul of my stereo system (which would run me thousands as my next system may be the Bose lifestyle)
Then its a phillips relabeled as sony. With the exception of my Bose speakers, I only buy Sony products for my H.E. system. I am pretty sure it is the SONY SLV D500 DVD VCR combo. Though according to one website, it is supposed to support -R -RW but does NOT support +r +rw (which I utilize all the time).
Glad I didn't buy LOTR: Extended Platinum Edition 12 Disc set Widescreen last night...
Which is a rarity in and of itself -- usually companies do not like to discuss the potential of people overcoming their restrictions.
Really? With the exception of price (and it is not that much) I have had way more success with +R's then -R's. In fact I could never get the -R to work properly on my dvd player. I forget the exact model, but I have a DVD/VCR sony combo player. It plays VCD's also (about two years old). I have never been able to get a -R to play on it and I use the same process to burn to a -R that I do to my +R's
And a hack will be made, a firmware update released and in the end we will be back to what we are doing today. Not to mention this will take a LOT of time until it comes out and becomes mainstream (how many people are going to change their dvd players/recorders....meaning they won't be buying this new media format for a while)
If an startup artist who just signed with the RIAA does poorly who loses the most amount of money?
But whose choice is that to make? Your choice (or the peoples)? What gives you the right to decide how much Brittney Spears and her organizations want to charge for their own creation? Or should we let the gov't choose the price?
With available tech people steal the material. If people are legally allowed to steal the material (now it is not stealing, it is just taking for free) - they will do so. In all honesty - how many people are going to pay for something, when they can get it for free legally? Hell how many people out there pay for something when they can take it illegally with little risk of capture?
It is not our property - we did not make it, we have ZERO say. It is like if I knit a sweater. I can charge nothing for it(give it away), I can charge 5 bucks or I can charge 5,000 bucks. My choice. Your choice is to pay or not pay for it. If i see that people are not buying my sweaters I can either reduce the price or leave it as is. Again I have a choice to sell at the price that I want to sell, you have the choice to buy it or not. I can't see why this concept is so hard to grasp?
Please note I am not trying to incite you to anger, I am just trying to figure out why people have a problem with someone setting a price that they want on their property.
It is a legitimate concern. Some people/organizations want to create their product for profit (nothing wrong here). Put it this way - we know games like Doom 3, Halo 2, etc are multi-million dollar games and some of the most popular. How is the open source gaming industry doing? Except for a few games I played on Linux Redhat (came with it) that looked remarkably like other games I have played (one looked like Atari Asteroids) I didn't see anything there too original...none of them were spectacular. Though the Penguin body-sled game was pretty neat.
In your second paragraph you discuss how (generally) artists do not have the infrastructure or the contacts needed in this global industry...well so they are going to the RIAA/MPAA organizations and signing a contract - yes the organizations may get a majority of the profit - but it doesn't seem like the artists are doing too bad. As long as an artist can get one really good hit song out there they are sure to make a ton of cash. It's a trade off. What these guys are saying "You bring the talent we supply the capital taking a risk in you. If you do poorly you lose time but get some money, if you do great you get rich, we get richer. If you do not like the deal we are offering, do it on your own, nobody is stopping you."
The only thing I disagree about the RIAA/MPAA is their price fixing (notice cd/dvd sale prices never drop, even though in an elastic market it should); and possibly their thing about backing up cd/dvd's (though I understand their reasoning, since many people are stealing this material not just simply backing up material).
One of my econ classes i believe. Something about wealth distribution...not that it really works out as seen in Communist Russia, there were rich and poor and under an ideal communisim/socialism model everyone would be equal.
Yea well if you had to deal with the paparatzi trying to catch any kind of lewd, crude or embarassing video/audio of you, or your family on a 24/7 basis you would probably also have a major cocaine habit right? Not exactly fair to insinuate that all artists are utilizing drugs; actually its down right liabel (sp?).
Actually you are trying to separate communism and socialism into two distinct parts. While in theory we can talk about them as two distinct parts - the reality of it is that they work together. Kind of hard to have one without the other. Capitalism doesn't work to well with communism.
What is the incentive for a person to spend time and money to create a work if it will not be shared with the public (for profit probably)? Again, without copyright this person has no legal basis for recouping payment. So why would someone devot a lot of time and receive nothing (especially if it is their form of income)?
Not every well known artist utilizes the major labels and is subject to their reign (Metallica produces under their own label). While it is tough, and rare it does happen. Also, I am sure there are many small time bands who have their stuff distributed to a local area. It may be limited - but it does happen.
Just because something grants an exclusive right does not make it communist, in fact by forcing it to be open and free for the public you are saying you should share it - which is more communist then capitalist. What are these incentives that you are speaking of? Other then the right of exclusitivity what other benefit does the copyright holder get?
Who is pouring the millions of dollars into these peoples pockets? Is it the gov't or is it us the people? If it is the gov't, I did not realize they were paying Metallica's bills; if it is the people - well then apparantly a lot of people out there feel the artists should get paid (I have no problem with this - considering they have to deal with a LOT of crap we do not).
Is an artist truely forced to sell under the RIAA/MPAA? (with the exception of artists that accept funding from these organizations). If artists can sell their products under a different organization (or none at all) then this is not a monopoly. If the RIAA/MPAA is the best bet for an artist well that is the fault of those who are not willing to invest to compete. For example: Brittney Spears with the same marketing/advertising will do just as well no matter if she is working with the RIAA or the joeschmoe group.
Except this was a helicopter carrying 2-4 people. Not to mention, the height that a passenger jet (or any jet) flies, the speed that it moves, and the potentcy of the laser pointer --- you know how difficult it is to sucessfully hit a moving jet with a laser pointer? Here is a suggestion, next time a fruit-fly is buzzing around - try shining a laser pointer at it - see how sucessful you are - thats about what you would have to do to hit a plane that is moving hundreds of miles an hour and that is so far away from you.
you can sit 25 years in jail for pointing a laser pointer at a helicopter
And for murder can get out in under 5 years.
Yea our laws at work. Does someone ever review some of the laws and just make a flat out decision that some of the penalties are just assinine (in both directions).
well then you got me. Maybe they want to program the lights for holidays (i.e. thanksgiving day parade).
leap year - unless you want to have a HUGE team of people go out every four years to reset all of the stop lights in sync on a given day.
Failsafes are, typically, redundent versions of the primary system...if the primary system is flawed chances are the failesafe is flawed too. I don't think the original designers said "lets program the primary system with this dating system that might cause errors in the year 2000, but lets program the secondary system without this flaw."
LogoWriter...Apple IIe...brings a tear to my eye thinking about it. Ashame I went to an under funded urban public school so that all stopped after 6th grade. I had to pick it up on my own at home, and then in 11th and 12th did independent study with computers where I got to play with Mozilla :D
Ahhh Oregan Trail...the best game ever...I think i always picked the carpenter