I saw a Linux PC at Fry's Electronics the other day. Lindows, actually. It had crashed:-/
Further demonstration that attempting to be too much like windows is a bad idea.
Yeah, because, you know, all those universities don't have any problems with students finding ways to use all of their bandwidth.
Especially on a private computer, people will find a way. P2P apps are agressive enough to do it, and the big fat pipe will make running those nonstop all the more appealing. Unless they start out with budgets for 60-70% usage/bandwidth sold they are going to have problems.
Sure you can, don't say anything you shouldn't be saying at work anyways. Private conversations have no place in the office. If you don't want someone in the office to know your personal business, leave it at home.
Then again I am at work right now..... and on slashdot.
It involves taking something that someone else has a property right in. That's stealing.
I think the parent was trying to state that copying and stealing are not the same thing in all respects. Among other things when you purchase a movie (not a ticket to view a movie, but the actual picture in whatever media it comes to you) you are given the right to copy that movie within a narrow scope of possible uses. It is perfectly legal to copy a movie for the purpose of backing it up, for example. If you wanted to you could make copies of a movie and play them all at once. The problem comes in when you "redistribute" those movies in some fashion. You bought the movie, and as such are legally entitled to own more than just one copy of it, but once you start handing it out to someone else you have gone past your rights.
In summary, no copying!=stealing. That said in a movie theatre, it does because you don't have any rights to copy.
Yes, I did miss that. Thanks for pointing it out.
That said, although my statement was invalid in the specific sense (i.e. "you") I still hold that it's true in the general sense (i.e. the majority of people on slashdot who state that windows is crash happy but don't take hardware into account)
I never did say that "valid, logical arguments about the problems with Windows" do not exist. I simply said that your argument about the problems with windows as illustrated in your post was not valid, a point which you yourself stated. (and I missed) No need to turn into a grammar nazi over a misunderstanding. (That said, thanks for the hint)
In my experience, the majority of the time when someone is fined for an act that they profit from, the fine is nowhere even near the profits they make from the act. Also there's a problem of where the fine would go to the theatre? the movie studio? the actors/directors/others involved in making the movie? (my personal guess would be that it goes 99% #2 and 1% divided between anyone else)
The point i'm trying to make is that instituting a fine will probably fail to stop anybody. (like I said, in my experience fines generally don't even eat all the way through profits, so why stop when you're still making money/breaking even?) So, I guess jailtime works for me. There's no legitimate legal reason for a theatre patron to have a camcorder with them in a movie anyways.
Great conclusion you have there. Sure, we'll compare to their corprate peers, then not make a statement about what the group comprises which means
1) You talked yourself into a corner and decided not to look up/think about anything to back things up
2) You're making a poorly executed "microsoft is always a monopoly" joke. At the least next time make a list so people get where it's going, instead of thinking maybe point #1 is what happened.
Problem is that deciding, based off that, that XP is "a steaming pile, and the least stable Microsoft OS yet." is a pretty false conclusion. The fact that you could draw a correlation between hardware components and this OS problem limits accurate conclusions to "XP is a steaming pile, and the least stable Microsoft OS yet, for my hardware".
I'm not saying windows isn't without it's faults. I'm not saying XP doesn't have it's problems. All i'm saying is that if the Linux/OSS software communities (which slashdot can be generally taken to represent) want any respect they need to stop making childish general accusations and instead bring up valid, logical points.
That said, who besides slashdotters takes slashdot commentary with anything BUT a grain of salt anyways.
Slashdot Mirror
Someone mod this +5 dune reference
I saw a Linux PC at Fry's Electronics the other day. Lindows, actually. It had crashed :-/
Further demonstration that attempting to be too much like windows is a bad idea.
Yeah, because, you know, all those universities don't have any problems with students finding ways to use all of their bandwidth. Especially on a private computer, people will find a way. P2P apps are agressive enough to do it, and the big fat pipe will make running those nonstop all the more appealing. Unless they start out with budgets for 60-70% usage/bandwidth sold they are going to have problems.
In Soviet Russia you do not delete your email, your email deletes YOU.
Sure you can, don't say anything you shouldn't be saying at work anyways. Private conversations have no place in the office. If you don't want someone in the office to know your personal business, leave it at home.
Then again I am at work right now..... and on slashdot.
It involves taking something that someone else has a property right in. That's stealing. I think the parent was trying to state that copying and stealing are not the same thing in all respects. Among other things when you purchase a movie (not a ticket to view a movie, but the actual picture in whatever media it comes to you) you are given the right to copy that movie within a narrow scope of possible uses. It is perfectly legal to copy a movie for the purpose of backing it up, for example. If you wanted to you could make copies of a movie and play them all at once. The problem comes in when you "redistribute" those movies in some fashion. You bought the movie, and as such are legally entitled to own more than just one copy of it, but once you start handing it out to someone else you have gone past your rights. In summary, no copying!=stealing. That said in a movie theatre, it does because you don't have any rights to copy.
Yes, I did miss that. Thanks for pointing it out. That said, although my statement was invalid in the specific sense (i.e. "you") I still hold that it's true in the general sense (i.e. the majority of people on slashdot who state that windows is crash happy but don't take hardware into account) I never did say that "valid, logical arguments about the problems with Windows" do not exist. I simply said that your argument about the problems with windows as illustrated in your post was not valid, a point which you yourself stated. (and I missed) No need to turn into a grammar nazi over a misunderstanding. (That said, thanks for the hint)
In my experience, the majority of the time when someone is fined for an act that they profit from, the fine is nowhere even near the profits they make from the act. Also there's a problem of where the fine would go to the theatre? the movie studio? the actors/directors/others involved in making the movie? (my personal guess would be that it goes 99% #2 and 1% divided between anyone else) The point i'm trying to make is that instituting a fine will probably fail to stop anybody. (like I said, in my experience fines generally don't even eat all the way through profits, so why stop when you're still making money/breaking even?) So, I guess jailtime works for me. There's no legitimate legal reason for a theatre patron to have a camcorder with them in a movie anyways.
Great conclusion you have there. Sure, we'll compare to their corprate peers, then not make a statement about what the group comprises which means 1) You talked yourself into a corner and decided not to look up/think about anything to back things up 2) You're making a poorly executed "microsoft is always a monopoly" joke. At the least next time make a list so people get where it's going, instead of thinking maybe point #1 is what happened.
Problem is that deciding, based off that, that XP is "a steaming pile, and the least stable Microsoft OS yet." is a pretty false conclusion. The fact that you could draw a correlation between hardware components and this OS problem limits accurate conclusions to "XP is a steaming pile, and the least stable Microsoft OS yet, for my hardware". I'm not saying windows isn't without it's faults. I'm not saying XP doesn't have it's problems. All i'm saying is that if the Linux/OSS software communities (which slashdot can be generally taken to represent) want any respect they need to stop making childish general accusations and instead bring up valid, logical points. That said, who besides slashdotters takes slashdot commentary with anything BUT a grain of salt anyways.