I would wager that much of the motivation
for crippling their media players is the fear of being sued; Most corporations run internally like little freak capitalist-societies with separate divisions competing economically and legally with each other.
Hell, most universities run like this nowadays.
Just my 2p
Firstly, read a book by the Nobel-Prize winning economist Joseph Stiglitz called "Globalisation and it's Discontents".
Secondly, consider what you really mean by the word "efficient" when you use it in a pat phrase like "markets are the most efficient way to allocate resources".
Damn Straight. The P.R of bio-tech agriculture trys to sell the idea of the 'perfect' organism, be it wheat, barley or a cow. This is an appealing idea as it touches on the concept that all humans possess, the archetype. A platonic idealism if you like. Which, in reality is completely........bogus. Any monoculture is inherently at a greater risk than a diverse one because it is easier for harmful entities to specialise in its destruction. Another interesting facet which is never touched on by the PR machine of bio-tech is that the organisms they create are just as suseptible to mutation as any 'natural' organism. The problem being that the mutations of a 'natural' organism are well known in their effects and treatment where-as bio-tech mutations are the degradation of a completely new system, the effects of which are completely unknown and difficult to test safely.
Just a few of the many problems of bio-tech as I see it.:)
example of the underhanded nature of governments. We as cybercitizens should be be
psszt ngah naghh
@!!6
fghar';!)
nraaghg!!!!
pleased with the way things are going.
Go back to your cubicles, the contents of this
web-site is nothing but propaganda paid for
by none other than the evil Kim Il Jong
The truth is, as someone who has pirated music, I just dont give a crap about stealing music. Now I guess I could try and justify it with the standard reasons but you already know them. Why dont the holier-than-thou anti-piracy types justify their position. The reason they dont, I believe, is because to them being on the side of the law is all that matters. Either that or they believe in the "free market" and that by engaging in piracy you are somehow 'distorting' the market. As though there were such a thing as a free market in the music business. Why you would defend the music establishment is beyond me. This is an industry whos meat & potatoes revolves entirely around leveraging as much dosh as possible out of Mom & Pops wallets by way of their children.
And they're fucking good at it too. When asked what they think they will be when they grow up, surveys show that the kids of today all basically think they're going to be fuckin famous. It's patently absurd. I really feel sorry for the little buggers actually. Not only are they constantly fed shit ideas/products but they have little to no exercise as well, and are so fat that it is believed a whole generation of kids are going to have serious heart problems by their mid-30's! Oh Yes, I can see the future now. An entire generation of fat thirty-somethings living at home still clinging to the belief that a talent scout will 'find' them and shower them with fame, fortune and a triple by-pass operation.
Start Quote
Exaggeration.
Owners say that they suffer ``harm'' or ``economic loss'' when users copy programs themselves. But the copying has no direct effect on the owner, and it harms no one. The owner can lose only if the person who made the copy would otherwise have paid for one from the owner.
A little thought shows that most such people would not have bought copies. Yet the owners compute their ``losses'' as if each and every one would have bought a copy. That is exaggeration---to put it kindly.
End Quote
Richard Stallman's words, not mine. Hope he doesnt sue me.
about the view that people who make illegal copies should be punished(and usually it's advocated that it should be severe punishment) is that it is simply against the law and therefore WRONG!
If anything, law-breaking on a large scale should be an indicator that the law needs to be changed.
Im readin a great deal of posts here that talk about the dire consequences of open sourcing sun-java; there will be forking and everyone will make their own little version, etc etc...
This 'chaos' argument (as i like to call it) that people like to use (for all sorts of things including 'runaway human population')is invalid because of the one constraint which any real system will exhibit (commonly a resource constraint(Such as the one that inhibits the overly-lengthy/.-post subject;])).
Awww the poor little starving voice actors. What shall we doooo?! Should they get a) megabucks per show or b) megabucks per show.
Why the hell is this being posited like some kind of fricking moral dilemma? Are they greedy, is FOX greedy, is greed bad/good, how does this relate to every special little \. ethical philosphers view of the business world? oooo?
Discussing which of the two has the moral high-ground when the parties involved are infintely more powerful than the great majority of \.ers is a scenario both absurd and depressing.
Anyone concerned that this may spell the end for the simpsons need not worry. It is well within the interests of both the network and the actors to keep churning out the drivel that the last few seasons have been.
Many automotive pundits believe that hydrogen fuel cells are the way of the future, but what is often misunderstood is that hydrogen is merely an energy carrier, not a source, and as such has to be produced from some other source, ie oil, nuclear, solar, squirrels on a wheel etc. Finding a viable alternative to petroleum based transport is vital if some of the prominent oil geologists are to be believed, many of their predictions see oil production unable to meet demand as early as 2010.
For further info google "peak oil hubbert"
In poor taste I know, but I read this line:
"Do we really want to risk our young daughters eating abnormal quantities of lactoferrin and risking a higher rate of gigantomastia and breast cancer?"
as
".....risking a higher rate of gigantic lactating breasts?"
come on. Im not the only one.
right?
right?!?!
Slashdot Mirror
want. A population suffering from obescity epidmic living in a 1/6 gravity environment
I would wager that much of the motivation for crippling their media players is the fear of being sued; Most corporations run internally like little freak capitalist-societies with separate divisions competing economically and legally with each other. Hell, most universities run like this nowadays. Just my 2p
You need to do two things.
Firstly, read a book by the Nobel-Prize winning economist Joseph Stiglitz called "Globalisation and it's Discontents".
Secondly, consider what you really mean by the word "efficient" when you use it in a pat phrase like "markets are the most efficient way to allocate resources".
then take two aspirin and call me in the morning.
Damn Straight. The P.R of bio-tech agriculture
:)
trys to sell the idea of the 'perfect' organism, be it wheat, barley or a cow.
This is an appealing idea as it touches on the
concept that all humans possess, the archetype. A platonic idealism if you like. Which, in reality is completely........bogus. Any monoculture is inherently at a greater risk than a diverse one because it is easier for harmful entities to specialise in its destruction.
Another interesting facet which is never touched on by the PR machine of bio-tech is that the organisms they create are just as suseptible to
mutation as any 'natural' organism. The problem being that the mutations of a 'natural' organism
are well known in their effects and treatment where-as bio-tech mutations are the degradation of a completely new system, the effects of which are completely unknown and difficult to test safely.
Just a few of the many problems of bio-tech as I see it.
example of the underhanded nature of governments. We as cybercitizens should be be psszt ngah naghh @!!6 fghar';!) nraaghg!!!! pleased with the way things are going. Go back to your cubicles, the contents of this web-site is nothing but propaganda paid for by none other than the evil Kim Il Jong
The truth is, as someone who has pirated music, I just dont give a crap about stealing music. Now I guess I could try and justify it with the standard reasons but you already know them.
Why dont the holier-than-thou anti-piracy types justify their position. The reason they dont, I believe, is because to them being on the side of the law is all that matters.
Either that or they believe in the "free market" and that by engaging in piracy you are somehow
'distorting' the market. As though there were such a thing as a free market in the music business.
Why you would defend the music establishment is beyond me. This is an industry whos meat & potatoes revolves entirely around leveraging as much dosh as possible out of Mom & Pops wallets by way of their children.
And they're fucking good at it too. When asked what they think they will be when they grow up, surveys show that the kids of today all basically think they're going to be fuckin famous. It's patently absurd. I really feel sorry for the little buggers actually. Not only are they constantly fed shit ideas/products but they have little to no exercise as well, and are so fat that it is believed a whole generation of kids are going to have serious heart problems by their mid-30's!
Oh Yes, I can see the future now. An entire generation of fat thirty-somethings living at home still clinging to the belief that a talent scout will 'find' them and shower them with fame, fortune and a triple by-pass operation.
Now what was I talking about, oh yeah piracy....
Start Quote Exaggeration. Owners say that they suffer ``harm'' or ``economic loss'' when users copy programs themselves. But the copying has no direct effect on the owner, and it harms no one. The owner can lose only if the person who made the copy would otherwise have paid for one from the owner. A little thought shows that most such people would not have bought copies. Yet the owners compute their ``losses'' as if each and every one would have bought a copy. That is exaggeration---to put it kindly. End Quote Richard Stallman's words, not mine. Hope he doesnt sue me.
about the view that people who make illegal copies should be punished(and usually it's advocated that it should be severe punishment) is that it is simply against the law and therefore WRONG! If anything, law-breaking on a large scale should be an indicator that the law needs to be changed.
Im readin a great deal of posts here that talk about the dire consequences of open sourcing sun-java; there will be forking and everyone will make their own little version, etc etc...
/.-post subject ;])).
This 'chaos' argument (as i like to call it) that people like to use (for all sorts of things including 'runaway human population')is invalid because of the one constraint which any real system will exhibit (commonly a resource constraint(Such as the one that inhibits the overly-lengthy
Been spending most my life,
delivering geeks' drinks on ice...
in the growing body of evidence to support my thesis that most people
really dont give a crap about anything past their next meal.
Awww the poor little starving voice actors. What shall we doooo?! Should they get a) megabucks per show or b) megabucks per show. Why the hell is this being posited like some kind of fricking moral dilemma? Are they greedy, is FOX greedy, is greed bad/good, how does this relate to every special little \. ethical philosphers view of the business world? oooo? Discussing which of the two has the moral high-ground when the parties involved are infintely more powerful than the great majority of \.ers is a scenario both absurd and depressing. Anyone concerned that this may spell the end for the simpsons need not worry. It is well within the interests of both the network and the actors to keep churning out the drivel that the last few seasons have been.
This is what we can look forward too. http://www.oilcrash.com/after_c.htm
Many automotive pundits believe that hydrogen fuel cells are the way of the future, but what is often misunderstood is that hydrogen is merely an energy carrier, not a source, and as such has to be produced from some other source, ie oil, nuclear, solar, squirrels on a wheel etc. Finding a viable alternative to petroleum based transport is vital if some of the prominent oil geologists are to be believed, many of their predictions see oil production unable to meet demand as early as 2010. For further info google "peak oil hubbert"
In poor taste I know, but I read this line: "Do we really want to risk our young daughters eating abnormal quantities of lactoferrin and risking a higher rate of gigantomastia and breast cancer?" as ".....risking a higher rate of gigantic lactating breasts?" come on. Im not the only one. right? right?!?!