Well played sir. Your are exactly right - while I am a certainly very mucha supporter of privacy, Im pretty sure a missing person would rather be found than not found, and that's really all there is to the argument.
Not only that, but isnt a bit presumptious by saying "Its too salty for humans, and therefore, nothing could have possibly lived there". Doesnt that seem short sighted to anyone else?
They are ALL freedom-hating political hacks, because there is more power to gain from restriction the freedom of others, than there is in setting others free.
While i certainly partake (and encourage others) to download to their hearts desire, i full recognize that I am stealing. Its just that im taking so little from so many, that i dont care.
Now, have i donated money to my favourite bands? Spread the word, and encouraged others to do the same? Damn right.
But to say "they aren't taking anything from anyone"? Hardly correct sir - you ARE still stealing.
I steal my coffee from my college everyday, yet I still buy one a week. Why? Because i recognize that they ARE still providing something i want, and that it costs something to stock something other than Tim Hortons and Starbucks. (Admittedly, of all the chains, Tim Hortons is far and away the king. But theyre much harder to steal from).
I just wish there was a better way to donate to TV show and movie producers (or whoever). But then again, id be hard pressed to send 5$ to Ben Affleck....
Sorta. I mean, the whole NES and SNES cart thing was pretty bad. But Atari took the cake for being a dick to their programmers.
But, really, the same basic idea is occuring. And in a way, i don't really blame any of them for it. I dont like it, but in Nintendo's case, they can't control much. Microsoft only does software.
Apple, on the other hand...
Well, in all seriousness, they have such a small marketshare (admittedly growing), that it doesnt matter, yet.
And technically, all the consoles are just as paranoid. As far as I know, Microsoft is way worse for bricking hacked consoles than Nintendo is.
And in a truly terrifying turn of events, Sony doesnt seem to care very much. But, in their case, it means someone actually bought the console.
I assume, without RTFA, that this is a step in the direction for allowing homebrewers to save games on the console.
I confess, despite being an avid Nintendo fan, that I'm irritated at the Apple and Microsoft-like paranoia in keeping people out of their software/hardware.
Im pretty sure i stated "with suspicious behaviour." I also said that suspicious behaviour is incredibly difficult to define - thats not what im talking about, though.
I was NOT stating that every single East Indian get pulled to the side and be searched, while white people get to walk past unmolested. Im saying that security should have to freedom to search whoever they want. Always. The same deal goes for a billionaire - if someone absurdly rich is flying on a plane, they will definitley not be searched. That is ALSO bullshit, and goes against the basic concept of equality.
Im sure you can get in board if it was a rich guy, right? Everyone hates them.
No, actually. Not in the least. I am white, but i am in no way Christian.
I can see how abuse of the concept can be incredibly destructive, but thats why the "suspicious behaviour" clause is in there. As it is now, i see people 90 years old and 15 years old being pulled to the side for extended checks, which is absolutely rediculous.
Its about equality, right? As i said before, since when are special previleges and immunities given to certain people equal?
I dunno, i find the lack of racial profiling has gone too far. It IS more common for islamic extremists to be, i dunno, islamic, and therefore, if there is other suspicious behaviour, i see no problem with them being inspected.
The problem is that rather than officials being free to inspect anyone who is acting suspciously (with problems with that basic concept aside), they are virtually not allowed to inspect an islamic person who is acting suspiciously.
It all boils down to the bizarre act of giving people who where treated poorly in the past or present, as a race, sex, or culture, special priveleges.
Back on track, I can't really see why this is a big problem. I do think it is POSSIBLE to become a problem - but as someone else said, lets worry about it when it actually does become a problem worth preventing. Arguably, it may then be too late - but we cant go around preventing good ideas just because an abuse of it can be destructive. Because really, anything can be abused, and many of them, to great detriment.
Everyone is close minded. Especially when it comes to *-bashing.
And no, thats not asterisk bashing. One thing can all agree on - the asterisk rocks, and I absolutely refuse to accept any other input on the subject, as my opinion is final, and anyone who disagrees is an idiot.
I do not recall where, but I distincly remember reading on/. that someone mentioned that Microsoft isn't against open source.
Obviously, I have no proof to back this up, but I can certainly assume that Microsoft could be far more aggressive against open source if they wanted to be.
Slashdot Mirror
-Red
-Red
Not the OP, btw.
-Red
-Red
Don't you mean "For I, one, dyslexic our overlords pirates."?
So OP, are you a dyslexic pirate?
-Red
Now, have i donated money to my favourite bands? Spread the word, and encouraged others to do the same? Damn right.
But to say "they aren't taking anything from anyone"? Hardly correct sir - you ARE still stealing.
I steal my coffee from my college everyday, yet I still buy one a week. Why? Because i recognize that they ARE still providing something i want, and that it costs something to stock something other than Tim Hortons and Starbucks. (Admittedly, of all the chains, Tim Hortons is far and away the king. But theyre much harder to steal from).
I just wish there was a better way to donate to TV show and movie producers (or whoever). But then again, id be hard pressed to send 5$ to Ben Affleck....
Anyways. You get my point.
-Red
Doesnt that go against the whole "Net neutrality" argument? -Red
Absurd.
Interesting notes, however.
Yeah..... right.
-Red
-Red
All of the class of Universal Media Group disagrees.
-Red
Sorta. I mean, the whole NES and SNES cart thing was pretty bad. But Atari took the cake for being a dick to their programmers.
But, really, the same basic idea is occuring. And in a way, i don't really blame any of them for it. I dont like it, but in Nintendo's case, they can't control much. Microsoft only does software.
Apple, on the other hand...
Well, in all seriousness, they have such a small marketshare (admittedly growing), that it doesnt matter, yet.
And technically, all the consoles are just as paranoid. As far as I know, Microsoft is way worse for bricking hacked consoles than Nintendo is.
And in a truly terrifying turn of events, Sony doesnt seem to care very much. But, in their case, it means someone actually bought the console.
I guess beggars cant be choosers, eh?
-Red
I assume, without RTFA, that this is a step in the direction for allowing homebrewers to save games on the console.
I confess, despite being an avid Nintendo fan, that I'm irritated at the Apple and Microsoft-like paranoia in keeping people out of their software/hardware.
-Fred
But, you cant have everything. Although i think you SHOULD.
-Red
I was NOT stating that every single East Indian get pulled to the side and be searched, while white people get to walk past unmolested. Im saying that security should have to freedom to search whoever they want. Always. The same deal goes for a billionaire - if someone absurdly rich is flying on a plane, they will definitley not be searched. That is ALSO bullshit, and goes against the basic concept of equality.
Im sure you can get in board if it was a rich guy, right? Everyone hates them.
-Red
I can see how abuse of the concept can be incredibly destructive, but thats why the "suspicious behaviour" clause is in there. As it is now, i see people 90 years old and 15 years old being pulled to the side for extended checks, which is absolutely rediculous.
Its about equality, right? As i said before, since when are special previleges and immunities given to certain people equal?
-Red
The problem is that rather than officials being free to inspect anyone who is acting suspciously (with problems with that basic concept aside), they are virtually not allowed to inspect an islamic person who is acting suspiciously.
It all boils down to the bizarre act of giving people who where treated poorly in the past or present, as a race, sex, or culture, special priveleges.
Back on track, I can't really see why this is a big problem. I do think it is POSSIBLE to become a problem - but as someone else said, lets worry about it when it actually does become a problem worth preventing. Arguably, it may then be too late - but we cant go around preventing good ideas just because an abuse of it can be destructive. Because really, anything can be abused, and many of them, to great detriment.
-Red
Everyone is close minded. Especially when it comes to *-bashing.
And no, thats not asterisk bashing. One thing can all agree on - the asterisk rocks, and I absolutely refuse to accept any other input on the subject, as my opinion is final, and anyone who disagrees is an idiot.
-Red
Or, just as likely, covering up for either of those two situations.
-Red
Obviously, I have no proof to back this up, but I can certainly assume that Microsoft could be far more aggressive against open source if they wanted to be.
-Red
Huh.
Funny.
You know, here I was, thinking that Vista had a totally new API and GDI. How silly of me.
-Red
You know, that would have been much funnier if you only had to press enter to add spaces to a post.
But, such is the spice of /.
-Red
Wow. I wish i had mode points.
Awesome. Hilarious.
-Red