For me, it'd be the opposite. I can't see myself ever getting married, but I would like to have a child. Sadly though, that's pretty much an impossibility.
This sounds like a really BAD idea to me. Either it works really well and then people will start asking why it isn't being used on the general population or it wont work and we'll be focusing our attention on the wrong people. What's the indicator of success? A reduction in homicide rates among people singled out? Our justice system is based on dealing with people AFTER they break the law, everyone, even people at "high risk" to commit crime have to actually do something wrong before you can take action. It may just be used to focus rehabilitation and surveillance efforts on high risk people, but the profiling potential for this must be obvious to the people who designed it, then all it takes is for a little public exposure of how this system could have saved some children if it had been used more aggressively. I'm a bit uneasy about any technology or system that seeks to punish people retroactively. The way the article describes it as working seems harmless now, but the potential of abuse is there. Definitely something to keep an eye on.
Efficient? Maybe, until you start adding all the features I need in a media player, like I don't know, a decent interface. You'll get to 30+ MB of memory EASY before you are anywhere close to the functionality that's needed. Small memory footprint by default yes, I'll give you that, but they accomplished that by removing features most people would expect.
I agree, but the sad part is that this tactic often works. Few people want to challenge things like this because they don't want to look like they're defending child porn (or not doing the most they can to stop it.).
Failing college is the punishment. If you're stupid enough to drink to such excess after learning your own limits you probably don't belong there anyway.
It wouldn't. A smoker only feels "calmed down" because their craving has been satiated. The physical effects of nicotine increase stress on the brain and heart, they can focus because they're not constantly thinking about when they'll get their next hit, or how long they'll have to wait.
Thank you for sharing in detail what makes him "...absolutely stupid...". You realized it was so obvious that you skipped right to ad hominem attacks. You're a shining beacon of humanity.
How fortunate then that every sex act imaginable--and some that I can't imagine--has been performed, recorded, and uploaded to the internet multiple times. If porn production stopped today, you would still have several human lives of "back-catalogue" material to make use of, even if you only take the sub-genres that you like.
Your argument assumes that DRM works. It doesn't. The money is better spent producing more content, or increasing the quality of what you do make. Hell, maybe even kick a few dollars over to the musicians. Anything would be better than spending millions of dollars on technology that at best is mildly amusing to us "freeloaders" and at worst aggravating to paying customers.
Reword your rhetoric to something reasonable or failing that, STFU.
They'll be "[eating] the resulting...loss in piracy(sic)" no matter what they do. No amount of DRM will keep full resolution HD media out of the wild. The only constraint this time is bandwidth to transfer those huge files.
My DVD drive is region free, all my foreign DVDs work in my domestic player, and I have copies of most of them on my computer. DVD drm was thoroughly raped, and whatever measures they include in Blu-Ray will be equally ravaged.
All of my music from BT and eMule works on my iPod. The iPod is a solid mp3 player, iTunes and the entire software "package" that is parasitically attached to it is what sucks.
You're missing the point. If you're going to break the law anyway, why would you settle for crappy 128kbps AAC files? It doesn't cost any more (Still 0$) to download a high quality VBR mp3, so that's what gets shared. If they unlocked all the ITMS files you wouldn't see any of them end up on p2p because there are already better copies of those files on the network.
People pay for songs on iTunes because they want to feel like they are helping the artists (They're not BTW) or they're scared enough to think that they actually might get caught for sharing music on p2p. People certainly don't use it for the "experience" or quality.
Why would someone waste their time downloading a 128kbps file? Most of the illegal stuff is MUCH better quality than that. The songs on BT and other p2p networks usually come from CDs, putting DRM on the ITMS files isn't stopping them from spreading because they're already being shared in mp3 format ripped from CDs.
Slashdot Mirror
We call them traps on /b/
Learn to swim.
For me, it'd be the opposite. I can't see myself ever getting married, but I would like to have a child. Sadly though, that's pretty much an impossibility.
This sounds like a really BAD idea to me. Either it works really well and then people will start asking why it isn't being used on the general population or it wont work and we'll be focusing our attention on the wrong people. What's the indicator of success? A reduction in homicide rates among people singled out? Our justice system is based on dealing with people AFTER they break the law, everyone, even people at "high risk" to commit crime have to actually do something wrong before you can take action. It may just be used to focus rehabilitation and surveillance efforts on high risk people, but the profiling potential for this must be obvious to the people who designed it, then all it takes is for a little public exposure of how this system could have saved some children if it had been used more aggressively. I'm a bit uneasy about any technology or system that seeks to punish people retroactively. The way the article describes it as working seems harmless now, but the potential of abuse is there. Definitely something to keep an eye on.
I did the exact same thing last night, and I missed the save crystal right outside that area so it was back to the fortress for me.
Efficient? Maybe, until you start adding all the features I need in a media player, like I don't know, a decent interface. You'll get to 30+ MB of memory EASY before you are anywhere close to the functionality that's needed. Small memory footprint by default yes, I'll give you that, but they accomplished that by removing features most people would expect.
That's the funniest translation error I've ever read. It's almost too witty to have actually happened by accident.
I agree, but the sad part is that this tactic often works. Few people want to challenge things like this because they don't want to look like they're defending child porn (or not doing the most they can to stop it.).
Hey mods, this isn't off-topic. Only a top level comment can be off topic, this answers the question in the parent and thus is on topic.
It's over rated.
Failing college is the punishment. If you're stupid enough to drink to such excess after learning your own limits you probably don't belong there anyway.
It wouldn't. A smoker only feels "calmed down" because their craving has been satiated. The physical effects of nicotine increase stress on the brain and heart, they can focus because they're not constantly thinking about when they'll get their next hit, or how long they'll have to wait.
...and then death.
Just wait until he starts talking about bringing back the gold standard, and private militias, it's too bad we don't have a -1 Bat Shit Insane mod.
Thank you for sharing in detail what makes him "...absolutely stupid...". You realized it was so obvious that you skipped right to ad hominem attacks. You're a shining beacon of humanity.
How fortunate then that every sex act imaginable--and some that I can't imagine--has been performed, recorded, and uploaded to the internet multiple times. If porn production stopped today, you would still have several human lives of "back-catalogue" material to make use of, even if you only take the sub-genres that you like.
Good thing I don't play/care about Halo then. Halo and its sequel were mediocre at best--not to mention being locked on an inferior platform.
Those are cable channels. They can show whatever they want, as long as the advertisers agree.
Your argument assumes that DRM works. It doesn't. The money is better spent producing more content, or increasing the quality of what you do make. Hell, maybe even kick a few dollars over to the musicians. Anything would be better than spending millions of dollars on technology that at best is mildly amusing to us "freeloaders" and at worst aggravating to paying customers.
Reword your rhetoric to something reasonable or failing that, STFU.
When I can buy movies without any DRM I will. Until then I have no objections to getting as much content as I can for free.
They'll be "[eating] the resulting...loss in piracy(sic)" no matter what they do. No amount of DRM will keep full resolution HD media out of the wild. The only constraint this time is bandwidth to transfer those huge files.
My DVD drive is region free, all my foreign DVDs work in my domestic player, and I have copies of most of them on my computer. DVD drm was thoroughly raped, and whatever measures they include in Blu-Ray will be equally ravaged.
DRM is irrelevant.
All of my music from BT and eMule works on my iPod. The iPod is a solid mp3 player, iTunes and the entire software "package" that is parasitically attached to it is what sucks.
You're missing the point. If you're going to break the law anyway, why would you settle for crappy 128kbps AAC files? It doesn't cost any more (Still 0$) to download a high quality VBR mp3, so that's what gets shared. If they unlocked all the ITMS files you wouldn't see any of them end up on p2p because there are already better copies of those files on the network.
People pay for songs on iTunes because they want to feel like they are helping the artists (They're not BTW) or they're scared enough to think that they actually might get caught for sharing music on p2p. People certainly don't use it for the "experience" or quality.
Why would someone waste their time downloading a 128kbps file? Most of the illegal stuff is MUCH better quality than that. The songs on BT and other p2p networks usually come from CDs, putting DRM on the ITMS files isn't stopping them from spreading because they're already being shared in mp3 format ripped from CDs.
DRM does not stop or slow anything.
Are you kidding? The LP makes the Republican party look like socialist anarchists.
I mean, the gold standard!? WTF are you people thinking!?