you download free security software you cannot be certain what you get
Because when he buys that software for a price then he can be certain what he'll get ? I won't even go on with that.
Thing is, whatever good firewall and antivirus and whatever else Vista might contain, I'd rather trust a company with a long record of producing good firewall [etc] software than what MS will include in there. If he so much emphasizes the "trust" part of this whole thing, then the question is [falsely] seemingly simple: which company you trust more [well, if you trust any company, that is]. For me, just because MS thinks he should include a firewall and other protective tools, is not enough reason to drop those product which I've been using for some time and which have proven to be trusworthy. And I won't list them with purpose, since this is not about one particular product or the other.
Regarding MS, "trust" is not a word that is any near of the top of my list. Yes, this is my own feeling. But I'm not alone with this, and that's exactly why security companies will have a chance of survival.
As always, when "competing" with MS [see, that's another isue brought alvie by MS PR, that whatever anybody comes up with, has to be in competition with them] those companies had the most chance that concentrated on specific issues rather than being everything everywhere like them.
Some [most] of av and fw software already have Vista-running versions, even my favourites have and I use them when I try the latest beta. If Vista's included tools will someday prove to be at least so effective than these tools, I might consider dropping them. BBC or MS PR is just not enough.
I'm not trying to troll here (although I'm sure I'll be modded that way because I realize many of you just don't want to hear all of this), but the last line in this story provoked me. I'm trying to help the Linux community with this commentary, not flame it. I want to believe in Linux, but the issues on most distros boggles my mind... how can something so buggy earn a reputation of reliability?
Not trying, yet you succeed pretty well. You start with saying windows is wonderfully awesome since all bsods et al. have been eliminated, then state linux is humongously buggy and can't be realyl having a good reputation. And, rising shine, you also add a typical butthead line there, I'm-not-trying-to-be-unjust-i's-just-you-don't-wan t-to-listen, how wonderful of you. Implicitely you do the same as others to explicitely. That might give you some reward, still, the intention is the same thus the moderation should be the same. And see, wonders, you still got modded up in the skies.
Now, about the story, I frequently see even to this day driver-related bsods on totally stable and quality hardware, on which linux runs flawlessly, some desktops, some servers, some laptops. No service pack and no patch and no PR could earse windows troubles from my mind, sorry sir. About the rc1 Vista, yes it's more usable than beta versions, it is, still, long way to go until I'd even consider it anything but a multimillion dollar pet project now worthy of some real testing.
Yes, much like you would run a firewall to protect 'poorly written software that is security-hole ridden'. Sometimes writting software to catch the exploits is easier and takes less maintenance completely eliminating each and every little bug.
You write firewalls to have control over the access to your software. No firewall will protect you from sql injection, from buffer overflows, so on and so forth. The point of view they have taken on this matter is imho a flawed one: here's a bad code, we won't fix it, instead we write some obscure code to filter and control the inputs to the bad code. Then we will write another more obscure code to filter the input of the fist filter. Once you take this path, there's no turning back. You either write a totally fresh new code and drop all the filters, or you just continue to write more and more such filters till you loose all your hair.
I seriously hate to say it, but in today's business climate knowing PowerPoint is one of the basics. Maybe not for 6-8th graders, but at some point many, many people need to use PowerPoint.
No. You need to know how to make presentations.
About what schools should teach to 6-graders, that's another question. I'm also on the view that giving laptops or other gadgets in school just will raise their level of distraction. If they say they can't teach without laptops, your kids shouldn't belong there really.
If we're talking real IDE with a GUI, the answers from me would be Kdevelop3 and Eclipse.
Both are fine, nice, sometimes superb. And yes, both need some adaptation from the coder's part, but after that, you'll just find that they both do their job pretty well.
the communist government in the Indian state of Kerala
In fact, this decision has nothing to do with the specific government being communist or not, and I welcome this decision, although I have nothing to do with India whatsoever. But, as wonderful western objective journalism rules expect, how nice it is to insert that word in there so as to inflate a latent (or not) hostility right in the beginning towards whatever might come in the following text. Instead of just saying Kerala's state government decided to encourage this and that. These days, I've just become really sensitive to slight (or not so slight) political overtones.
Easy, if you don't talk about the rest as being "competitors", however smartass ide that might be, you can't make MS Office a winner, or do you ? Nothing new.
GE modified foods will not be accepted by the masses until there are enough deaths or suffering as a result of hunger/malnutrition to make people aware of an alternative. History does this time and again, you just have to look.
Just as history also shows where placing too much power in the hands of untrustworthy people [GE crop companies modifying crop genome as they see fit] can lead us. If GE crop wouldn't infect natural crop, if companies could be trusted not to use their power in being [in a hypothetical future] the only seed source, if we wouldn't have read too much sci-fi literature [what else could they add to the food], then, maybe, one day, we would trust GE food.
companies that control the resulting seeds, and the risk of the spliced genes "infecting" the environment
Exactly. And I'd add to that, that infecting is part of the long term plans of GE food companies. Just think, after a few dozen cycles, we just might arrive to a point where everyone will have to buy the seeds from the only source there will remain: the GE food companies. And controlling the crop food chain is really much power.
Europeans and Asians get their knickers in a knot over the nebulous dangers of GE foods, but they smoke like fiends. I don't get people who ignore the real hazards in life to focus on the unproven ones.
Yeesh, so you saying Americans don't smoke, love GE food, are well aware of real hazards in life and focus on the proven ones ?
I think I have to call my doc to check if it's time for my next scheduled brainwashing session.
The day when the price of the food will include royalty fees on top of the taxes, that day will be the last I will spend in the "civilized" world. I'd rather live in a cave then in a world like that. And thing is, I'd probably get packing until there are empty caves left.
Yes, how about that. Get back to me when you are naked, living in the forest, gathering fruits and berries for food.
Leading a natural life doesn't exclude adaptation. But doesn't include genetical messing with the plants. But adaptation to stupidity is not something even a "naturally" living human being could easily do.
it is a stupid statement, a more correct statement would be "GE foods are not more harmfull than non GE foods."
Which is just as stupid statement. Unless you can prove it, I'll place my bets on food of whose genetic material no bloody company scientist has placed his hands on.
Sorry but the push for GM crops is because they can grow where other crops cannot. They can provide nutrients available by no other means. So what if someone profits, the fact the chance at profit existed is why the crop exists.
Yes, maybe we're wearing tinfoil hats, but you seem more ignorant. It's nothing wrong with producing genetically altered varieties of crops to make them grow where natural ones can't, in order to increase food supply. The problem is when they want to overtake the natural food production, which will lead us to a food source controlled by governments/companies [I'm not sure which is worse], to seed sources which are also controlled, to farmers who won't be able to grow crops unless they buy their seeds or pay their fees to these companies, etc. There is really great threat when people don't even try to think what consequences certain governmental actions can bring upon them in the long term. And long term doesn't just mean your lifespan. It's the same with environmental pollution, with alternative energy sources, etc.
So forgive me when I, bloody european, say that I don't want any contact with GE food thankyouverymuch.
matured into a top notch competitor in the server (and desktop in my opinion)
I suspect I'll get a barrage of replies where readers describe "solutions" to all of the above. That would be great
You'd better decide, you bash it, or you like it. Well, you can do both, but that ain't always going to lead to a pleasant ending:)
Anyway, you list problems, all of which have very nice solutions, and you say you like it, you still don't know about them. And the best thing always is when a guy comes around, telling he's a linuxer, then complains about things that were problems, like, years ago. Don't like amarok, don't like digikam, don't know how to buy good and supported hw and to config it, fine. But don't tell it's hard or unsolvable. Everything is hard if you don't know how to do it. And not just in Linux. But of course, many people don't really like to have to learn new things. That's a problem in its own right.
Making Linux more accessible for the unprofessional crowds is an important issue, nobody would argue with that. But before trying to complain, it'd be good to look around.
Wrong placed PR on so many level... But, for once, we have arrived to a time in OS history when it's fashionable to market a product as being anything at all for Linux users:)
The majority of the internet is a 'barrier to productivity' for undisciplined people. [emph. added]
That [undisciplined people] is what you should kick out, not internet access.
There are very few people who can continously concentrate on doing quality job on the same thing for 8 hours, if there are any at all. In fact, I'd say if someobody can do 4-6/8 hours serious productive work (here I'm talking about work requiring continuous, not-negligable amounts of brain usage) that's really good. Why you should pay them for the remaining hours from 8 too ? So that they spend that quality time with you and with your competition, that's why.
That means all your people are ones who can be "productive" for 2x4 hours continuously, starting from your mark ? You're labelled "funny", but still, in case you're serious, I'd really like to know what planet you're writing from.
I've often felt that "computer science" as commonly constructed lacks any coherence, spanning everything from nearly pure mathematics to hardware and engineering, but Network Algorithmics has made me rethink that.
Ok, first sign that this is a book more in the "magazine" style than in the "scientific" style.
Apart from curious general readers with a computer science background, or hackers who enjoy stretching their minds, the obvious audience is anyone building high-performance network devices or looking at optimization of networking code, say in the Linux kernel.
I hope those who build those devices and work on optimizations in those codes have better education than such. For amateurs and generally interested, fine. But honestly, one who doesn't have the background and doesn't even have read the thing, pretty bald recommendations are made up there. In fact this review has been good: it saved me time since I know now that it'd be a waste of time.
but pointing out a flaw in one of their products is not trolling
I don't think telling you that my product supports this and this and that, and telling you that it doesn't yet support these and those yet, is a flaw in my product. It might be lack of features on my part, it might be lack of features in your browsers you would like to use with my product, still, when I tell you in advance what it does and what it doesn't, then I really think you shouldn't label it as being flawed.
If this was intended to be funny (which I highly doubt), then I didn't get the joke. Seriously, let's see how "journalism" shapes the Google image: Google releases new application X [substitute talk, spreadsheet, calendar, mail, maps, browsersync, desktop search, and so on and so forth] as a new threat to Microsoft application X ! then you find writings like why aren't Google apps successful, why don't Google apps generate more revenue, then again about some Google app Y which is supposedly a Microsoft app Y killer...
I'm simply tired of these formulations, such and similar sensationalistic approaches to about any app release, especially if it comes from Google.
Writely is nice, as G. spreadsheet is nice, and as many other stuff Google does are nice. But if I have to read again about them as some X-killers, I'm just going to bang some heads together.
Apps are apps. Good or bad. Nice or sucker. Whatever. Answer to something ? Killer of something ? Do you care ?!
unless it proves it can work with iPods, MP3s and WMP
This is the usual media crap we see these days popping up everyplace. And we also should tell everywhere that it's not true, iPods are easy (try Amarok or choose your poison), mp3/ogg/every other music format is easy, wmp is easy (think next realplayer version, think mplayer, etc.).
Whenever I try to pitch Linux to anyone under 30, the question I get is: 'Will it work with my iPod?
While this is not a question anybody should be surprised about, I'm still happy that where I live is apprarently not like where he lives:)
at the end of 2008. After that the operating system gets locked in for the next 30 years
I don't think we (linux or not) need such close-minded people. This smells more rotten than anything else.
Among teens aged 12 to 17 who were polled, 69 percent said they thought it was legal to copy a CD from a friend who purchased the original.
Man, I just love these kids. Wait a sec, I'll tel you while.
As a quick intro, I'm not even 30 yet, but I still remember the good old days when we used to record dozens of casette tapes with songs from the radio, play it for ourselves, play them on parties, copy it to other friends. Then, if someone managed to get an original tape from somewhere (where I grew up these things were really not that easy to get) we just were just exstatic, everybody copied it and we listened to it till the tape rotted away. We never ever felt we were doing anything that could be labelled as s crime, crime is when you kill someone, not when you listen to music.
These days I buy CDs. I have CDs from most of the bands that we were listening to when we were kids too. If I weren't listening to them on those tapes, I probably wouldn't have bought these disks. If one of my friends would ask me to borrow him a disk, I would do it with no second thought, they would do the same. I know some associations would label us as criminals, still, while I rarely would download music these days, I would still like to know what I'm buying before I'm buying it. I make oggs and mp3s of them to listen to on my portable and on my laptop. If somebody would label me a criminal, I'd smack'em. Still, if I couldn't make a copy or I couldn't lend it to a friend, I'd rather not even buy it.
So, why I love these kids ? Because they are not that brainwashed yet to forget what fair use should mean. In time, they will be, they have no escape. Still, I hope someday someone will realise that drming everything and dog, constraining people up to their necks [well, ears in this case], closing down everything and trying to control and watch everything and everybody is not a solution to anything. Instead of trying to establish even more harder lockdowns, they should just sit down, use their brains and figure out a bussinness model that suits every side - artists, listeners, studios. Yes, I didn't include associations in that list.
Slashdot Mirror
you download free security software you cannot be certain what you get
Because when he buys that software for a price then he can be certain what he'll get ? I won't even go on with that.
Thing is, whatever good firewall and antivirus and whatever else Vista might contain, I'd rather trust a company with a long record of producing good firewall [etc] software than what MS will include in there. If he so much emphasizes the "trust" part of this whole thing, then the question is [falsely] seemingly simple: which company you trust more [well, if you trust any company, that is]. For me, just because MS thinks he should include a firewall and other protective tools, is not enough reason to drop those product which I've been using for some time and which have proven to be trusworthy. And I won't list them with purpose, since this is not about one particular product or the other.
Regarding MS, "trust" is not a word that is any near of the top of my list. Yes, this is my own feeling. But I'm not alone with this, and that's exactly why security companies will have a chance of survival.
As always, when "competing" with MS [see, that's another isue brought alvie by MS PR, that whatever anybody comes up with, has to be in competition with them] those companies had the most chance that concentrated on specific issues rather than being everything everywhere like them.
Some [most] of av and fw software already have Vista-running versions, even my favourites have and I use them when I try the latest beta. If Vista's included tools will someday prove to be at least so effective than these tools, I might consider dropping them. BBC or MS PR is just not enough.
I'm not trying to troll here (although I'm sure I'll be modded that way because I realize many of you just don't want to hear all of this), but the last line in this story provoked me. I'm trying to help the Linux community with this commentary, not flame it. I want to believe in Linux, but the issues on most distros boggles my mind... how can something so buggy earn a reputation of reliability?
n t-to-listen, how wonderful of you. Implicitely you do the same as others to explicitely. That might give you some reward, still, the intention is the same thus the moderation should be the same. And see, wonders, you still got modded up in the skies.
Not trying, yet you succeed pretty well. You start with saying windows is wonderfully awesome since all bsods et al. have been eliminated, then state linux is humongously buggy and can't be realyl having a good reputation. And, rising shine, you also add a typical butthead line there, I'm-not-trying-to-be-unjust-i's-just-you-don't-wa
Now, about the story, I frequently see even to this day driver-related bsods on totally stable and quality hardware, on which linux runs flawlessly, some desktops, some servers, some laptops. No service pack and no patch and no PR could earse windows troubles from my mind, sorry sir. About the rc1 Vista, yes it's more usable than beta versions, it is, still, long way to go until I'd even consider it anything but a multimillion dollar pet project now worthy of some real testing.
Yes, much like you would run a firewall to protect 'poorly written software that is security-hole ridden'. Sometimes writting software to catch the exploits is easier and takes less maintenance completely eliminating each and every little bug.
You write firewalls to have control over the access to your software. No firewall will protect you from sql injection, from buffer overflows, so on and so forth. The point of view they have taken on this matter is imho a flawed one: here's a bad code, we won't fix it, instead we write some obscure code to filter and control the inputs to the bad code. Then we will write another more obscure code to filter the input of the fist filter. Once you take this path, there's no turning back. You either write a totally fresh new code and drop all the filters, or you just continue to write more and more such filters till you loose all your hair.
two upstart powerhouses
WTF ?
I seriously hate to say it, but in today's business climate knowing PowerPoint is one of the basics. Maybe not for 6-8th graders, but at some point many, many people need to use PowerPoint.
No. You need to know how to make presentations.
About what schools should teach to 6-graders, that's another question. I'm also on the view that giving laptops or other gadgets in school just will raise their level of distraction. If they say they can't teach without laptops, your kids shouldn't belong there really.
If we're talking real IDE with a GUI, the answers from me would be Kdevelop3 and Eclipse.
:)
Both are fine, nice, sometimes superb. And yes, both need some adaptation from the coder's part, but after that, you'll just find that they both do their job pretty well.
Next question ?
the communist government in the Indian state of Kerala
In fact, this decision has nothing to do with the specific government being communist or not, and I welcome this decision, although I have nothing to do with India whatsoever. But, as wonderful western objective journalism rules expect, how nice it is to insert that word in there so as to inflate a latent (or not) hostility right in the beginning towards whatever might come in the following text. Instead of just saying Kerala's state government decided to encourage this and that. These days, I've just become really sensitive to slight (or not so slight) political overtones.
considered a competition
Easy, if you don't talk about the rest as being "competitors", however smartass ide that might be, you can't make MS Office a winner, or do you ? Nothing new.
GE modified foods will not be accepted by the masses until there are enough deaths or suffering as a result of hunger/malnutrition to make people aware of an alternative. History does this time and again, you just have to look.
Just as history also shows where placing too much power in the hands of untrustworthy people [GE crop companies modifying crop genome as they see fit] can lead us. If GE crop wouldn't infect natural crop, if companies could be trusted not to use their power in being [in a hypothetical future] the only seed source, if we wouldn't have read too much sci-fi literature [what else could they add to the food], then, maybe, one day, we would trust GE food.
companies that control the resulting seeds, and the risk of the spliced genes "infecting" the environment
Exactly. And I'd add to that, that infecting is part of the long term plans of GE food companies. Just think, after a few dozen cycles, we just might arrive to a point where everyone will have to buy the seeds from the only source there will remain: the GE food companies. And controlling the crop food chain is really much power.
Europeans and Asians get their knickers in a knot over the nebulous dangers of GE foods, but they smoke like fiends. I don't get people who ignore the real hazards in life to focus on the unproven ones.
Yeesh, so you saying Americans don't smoke, love GE food, are well aware of real hazards in life and focus on the proven ones ?
I think I have to call my doc to check if it's time for my next scheduled brainwashing session.
and did not pay royalties to Monsanto
The day when the price of the food will include royalty fees on top of the taxes, that day will be the last I will spend in the "civilized" world. I'd rather live in a cave then in a world like that. And thing is, I'd probably get packing until there are empty caves left.
Yes, how about that. Get back to me when you are naked, living in the forest, gathering fruits and berries for food.
Leading a natural life doesn't exclude adaptation. But doesn't include genetical messing with the plants. But adaptation to stupidity is not something even a "naturally" living human being could easily do.
it is a stupid statement, a more correct statement would be "GE foods are not more harmfull than non GE foods."
Which is just as stupid statement. Unless you can prove it, I'll place my bets on food of whose genetic material no bloody company scientist has placed his hands on.
Sorry but the push for GM crops is because they can grow where other crops cannot. They can provide nutrients available by no other means. So what if someone profits, the fact the chance at profit existed is why the crop exists.
Yes, maybe we're wearing tinfoil hats, but you seem more ignorant. It's nothing wrong with producing genetically altered varieties of crops to make them grow where natural ones can't, in order to increase food supply. The problem is when they want to overtake the natural food production, which will lead us to a food source controlled by governments/companies [I'm not sure which is worse], to seed sources which are also controlled, to farmers who won't be able to grow crops unless they buy their seeds or pay their fees to these companies, etc. There is really great threat when people don't even try to think what consequences certain governmental actions can bring upon them in the long term. And long term doesn't just mean your lifespan. It's the same with environmental pollution, with alternative energy sources, etc.
So forgive me when I, bloody european, say that I don't want any contact with GE food thankyouverymuch.
matured into a top notch competitor in the server (and desktop in my opinion)
:)
I suspect I'll get a barrage of replies where readers describe "solutions" to all of the above. That would be great
You'd better decide, you bash it, or you like it. Well, you can do both, but that ain't always going to lead to a pleasant ending
Anyway, you list problems, all of which have very nice solutions, and you say you like it, you still don't know about them. And the best thing always is when a guy comes around, telling he's a linuxer, then complains about things that were problems, like, years ago. Don't like amarok, don't like digikam, don't know how to buy good and supported hw and to config it, fine. But don't tell it's hard or unsolvable. Everything is hard if you don't know how to do it. And not just in Linux. But of course, many people don't really like to have to learn new things. That's a problem in its own right.
Making Linux more accessible for the unprofessional crowds is an important issue, nobody would argue with that. But before trying to complain, it'd be good to look around.
No, those would take the hit who don't agree with the crowd. Now go find previous bad examples for that.
alternative MP3 player for Linux
:)
Wrong placed PR on so many level... But, for once, we have arrived to a time in OS history when it's fashionable to market a product as being anything at all for Linux users
The majority of the internet is a 'barrier to productivity' for undisciplined people. [emph. added]
That [undisciplined people] is what you should kick out, not internet access.
There are very few people who can continously concentrate on doing quality job on the same thing for 8 hours, if there are any at all. In fact, I'd say if someobody can do 4-6/8 hours serious productive work (here I'm talking about work requiring continuous, not-negligable amounts of brain usage) that's really good. Why you should pay them for the remaining hours from 8 too ? So that they spend that quality time with you and with your competition, that's why.
doing other things when they should be productive
That means all your people are ones who can be "productive" for 2x4 hours continuously, starting from your mark ? You're labelled "funny", but still, in case you're serious, I'd really like to know what planet you're writing from.
I've often felt that "computer science" as commonly constructed lacks any coherence, spanning everything from nearly pure mathematics to hardware and engineering, but Network Algorithmics has made me rethink that.
Ok, first sign that this is a book more in the "magazine" style than in the "scientific" style.
Apart from curious general readers with a computer science background, or hackers who enjoy stretching their minds, the obvious audience is anyone building high-performance network devices or looking at optimization of networking code, say in the Linux kernel.
I hope those who build those devices and work on optimizations in those codes have better education than such. For amateurs and generally interested, fine. But honestly, one who doesn't have the background and doesn't even have read the thing, pretty bald recommendations are made up there. In fact this review has been good: it saved me time since I know now that it'd be a waste of time.
but pointing out a flaw in one of their products is not trolling
I don't think telling you that my product supports this and this and that, and telling you that it doesn't yet support these and those yet, is a flaw in my product. It might be lack of features on my part, it might be lack of features in your browsers you would like to use with my product, still, when I tell you in advance what it does and what it doesn't, then I really think you shouldn't label it as being flawed.
answer to Microsoft Word
If this was intended to be funny (which I highly doubt), then I didn't get the joke. Seriously, let's see how "journalism" shapes the Google image: Google releases new application X [substitute talk, spreadsheet, calendar, mail, maps, browsersync, desktop search, and so on and so forth] as a new threat to Microsoft application X ! then you find writings like why aren't Google apps successful, why don't Google apps generate more revenue, then again about some Google app Y which is supposedly a Microsoft app Y killer...
I'm simply tired of these formulations, such and similar sensationalistic approaches to about any app release, especially if it comes from Google.
Writely is nice, as G. spreadsheet is nice, and as many other stuff Google does are nice. But if I have to read again about them as some X-killers, I'm just going to bang some heads together.
Apps are apps. Good or bad. Nice or sucker. Whatever. Answer to something ? Killer of something ? Do you care ?!
unless it proves it can work with iPods, MP3s and WMP
:)
This is the usual media crap we see these days popping up everyplace. And we also should tell everywhere that it's not true, iPods are easy (try Amarok or choose your poison), mp3/ogg/every other music format is easy, wmp is easy (think next realplayer version, think mplayer, etc.).
Whenever I try to pitch Linux to anyone under 30, the question I get is: 'Will it work with my iPod?
While this is not a question anybody should be surprised about, I'm still happy that where I live is apprarently not like where he lives
at the end of 2008. After that the operating system gets locked in for the next 30 years
I don't think we (linux or not) need such close-minded people. This smells more rotten than anything else.
Among teens aged 12 to 17 who were polled, 69 percent said they thought it was legal to copy a CD from a friend who purchased the original.
Man, I just love these kids. Wait a sec, I'll tel you while.
As a quick intro, I'm not even 30 yet, but I still remember the good old days when we used to record dozens of casette tapes with songs from the radio, play it for ourselves, play them on parties, copy it to other friends. Then, if someone managed to get an original tape from somewhere (where I grew up these things were really not that easy to get) we just were just exstatic, everybody copied it and we listened to it till the tape rotted away. We never ever felt we were doing anything that could be labelled as s crime, crime is when you kill someone, not when you listen to music.
These days I buy CDs. I have CDs from most of the bands that we were listening to when we were kids too. If I weren't listening to them on those tapes, I probably wouldn't have bought these disks. If one of my friends would ask me to borrow him a disk, I would do it with no second thought, they would do the same. I know some associations would label us as criminals, still, while I rarely would download music these days, I would still like to know what I'm buying before I'm buying it. I make oggs and mp3s of them to listen to on my portable and on my laptop. If somebody would label me a criminal, I'd smack'em. Still, if I couldn't make a copy or I couldn't lend it to a friend, I'd rather not even buy it.
So, why I love these kids ? Because they are not that brainwashed yet to forget what fair use should mean. In time, they will be, they have no escape. Still, I hope someday someone will realise that drming everything and dog, constraining people up to their necks [well, ears in this case], closing down everything and trying to control and watch everything and everybody is not a solution to anything. Instead of trying to establish even more harder lockdowns, they should just sit down, use their brains and figure out a bussinness model that suits every side - artists, listeners, studios. Yes, I didn't include associations in that list.