How's that insightful? I'm not a huge OSS fanboy and I love the GIMP. I use it all the time for photo editing, conversions, and simple graphic creation. I used to pirate Photoshop to do the same thing, but the GIMP more than meets my needs.
God people....who cares? Sometimes Windows and Linux can be shitty, sometimes they can be great. As a daily user of both OS's, I say that problems occur in both OS's at about the same frequency, and are usually something trivial.
Buying something doesn't mean that the company must bend over backwards to make it work exactly how you think it should, especially when they have a return policy. If you don't like their product, return it and get something else.
Probably something about how every time an alternative has been tried it has ended terribly with large losses of life and shitty living conditions for those who linger on.
It's their goddamn product. They can do whatever they want with it. There is ZERO reason why you must have a copy of Avatar or Eminim's CD. If you don't like how they're selling it, don't buy it. Buy something from someone else that does things how you like.
>IP rights holders want control of entertainment. They do not want free or cheap entertainment to exist.
Oh nonsense. First of all, you're lumping every rights holder into the same group. This is wrong. There are some groups that want money for their work, some that give it away, and some that are a mix of both. The major record companies fall into that first group. But there are plenty of independent artists that fall into the second and third groups.
>if the world worked the way their model proposes it should, if you don't have the money then you wouldn't be able to listen to music, watch movies, or play electronic games.
You mean "their" music, movies, and games. They have the right to control how their work is distributed, and they should have that right. But you also have the right not to support them and to seek out alternative music, movies, and games that are released for free.
The thing that bothers me most about people who hold views like yours is that you have to have it exactly your way. You'd force everyone to go copyleft instead of letting people pick and choose how they want to handle their IP. You feel entitled to other people's work, and if things were the way that you wanted them, artists would be the poorest lot out there. The big companies might be a bit overbearing when it comes to protecting their rights, but you'd be hard pressed to find any of their artists scrapping by for money. Sure, artists make most of their money on performances, but if their music wasn't being heavily promoted by these companies, no one would ever hear of them.
Wow, what a rant. Let's go through it point by point, shall we?
>"Because they'd rather you not listen to their music at all than let you download it."
So if they won't give it to you for free, that means you can't download it? And if you can't download it, there's no other way to listen to it? What about regular radio and internet radio like Pandora and LastFM? I guess they don't count.
>"This is about information control, and controlling who can and cannot be happy."
No, it's about control the rights to their IP. Are you telling me that you can't be happy unless you can download your Miley Cyrus songs for nothing? There is a ton of free/cheap indie music out there that is not owned by or published through a major record label. Why can't you listen to that?
>"It's also about profit margins."
Yeah, they're businesses. Their goal is to make money.
>"They should be finding a way to make money on ad revenue but instead they want to keep the old models even when the economy doesn't support it."
They're making money on those supposedly "old models", and there are ad-supported music distribution systems popping up all over the place.
>"Because they'd rather lock you up than hire you or give you a raise."
What? Who is "they" in this sentence? Your boss at your job wants to lock you up? Or are you referring to the music companies? That doesn't make any sense either...why would a music company be in charge of your salary?
>"If a college student budgets $200 to spend on movies and music for that year thats what he or she is going to spend."
Yeah...most college students have a budget of $0 and get their entertainment through torrents and sites like Hulu and Pandora.
>"As the economy is getting worse they keep upping the price of the music on itunes so that young people can afford less and less of it."
The price of everything is going up...it's called inflation. Why would you expect music prices to be immune to that? And who said the economy is getting worse? I've been job hunting (currently employed) and I've seen more jobs this year than in the last two years.
>"And the 3 strikes policy is completely unacceptable, ruin a persons livelihood because they downloaded some music they couldn't afford or didn't want to risk paying for"
If they can't afford it, tough. It's not a necessity to have mainstream music and movies, especially when so much free and legal content is available online. And what do you mean by "risk paying for it"? It seems more risky to not pay for something.
>"Find another strategy, not wait until an economic depression to crack down hard on all the poor jobless undergrads and recent grads unless they really want to make the the situation worse and make people desperate."
Are you serious? You're trying to tell us that if people get in trouble for violating copyright, that it's going to make the economy worse and people desperate? You do realize that you're talking about entertainment here, right? Not food or housing. Entertainment. Aka...something to do when you don't feel like doing anything. I think you are really dramatizing this a lot.
>"If sales figures are down it's because we have less disposable income. If people aren't buying music, movies or art it's because they are paying their bills."
Ok, but that doesn't mean that these companies should start giving away their stuff for free, nor does it give anyone else the right to take it for free.
Yeah. When I was going to highschool on the Oregon coast, we'd go to the beach and build huge bonfires (think logs that were anywhere from 6 inches to a foot thick). Once the center of the fire had built up some nice, red coals, we'd have someone toss an aerosol can in while the rest of us took cover behind a large driftwood log or a trench that we had dug out. The person doing the tossing had to run like hell to take cover before the explosion. Usually we were rewarded with a huge fireball and smoke of various colors depending on what we threw in (paint, WD-40, whatever we could find in our parents garages). We also tried a few mini-propane tanks. Those didn't fireball; they just blew our bonfire to smithereens and coated the beach in burning embers in a 100ft radius. As far as shrapnel goes, usually the bottom would blow off of the aerosol cans, and the propane tanks would split in half.
Most phones do that. My Samsung phone loses signal strength if I hold it a certain way. There was a whole thread on Reddit yesterday where people were confirming the same affect on dozens of different phones. This is nothing specific with the iPhone. People are just being retards like usual.
Meh, I'm not impressed with your example. If you bought the laptop and it didn't work out of the box, you could have taken it back. If you bought it and it failed during the warranty period, you could have had Apple fix it. If it failed outside the warranty, too bad. That's the time period that you agreed the device should be covered by Apple when you bought the thing.
The probability of any kid being a boy is 0.5. The gender and age of any of your other kids is irrelevant. You can keep playing number and word games if you like, but the question is "What's the probability that my other child is a boy?" It's 0.5.
"TFA does a pretty good job of explaining why people have such a hard time understanding this."
Yes, he admits that people have a hard time because it's bullshit: "The difficulty of these problems is rooted in their artificiality: In real life, we almost always know why the information was selected, whereas these problems have been devised to eliminate that knowledge."
Slashdot Mirror
Uh....isn't that the same as telling a user to go buy something that works?
How's that insightful? I'm not a huge OSS fanboy and I love the GIMP. I use it all the time for photo editing, conversions, and simple graphic creation. I used to pirate Photoshop to do the same thing, but the GIMP more than meets my needs.
God people....who cares? Sometimes Windows and Linux can be shitty, sometimes they can be great. As a daily user of both OS's, I say that problems occur in both OS's at about the same frequency, and are usually something trivial.
Pedantic much? 20 meters is about 65.6 feet. Someone dropped the decimal instead of rounding. Big deal.
What's the point of taking photos of booms anyway? Convince me that this is important.
Where in the video does he hold the older iPhone? That video only shows him holding the iPhone 4.
Most phones lose some reception if you place your hand over the antenna. If you were in a weak signal area, you'd drop the call.
If anyone lost data, that's their problem, not Dell's. A blown out capacitor on the motherboard doesn't hurt the HD.
Name one then.
God, I hate people who over use the word "straw man", especially when I didn't make an argument to begin with.
I asked a question, you didn't answer it.
It's about as different as night is from day...so if you don't understand, I'm afraid I can't help you.
Buying something doesn't mean that the company must bend over backwards to make it work exactly how you think it should, especially when they have a return policy. If you don't like their product, return it and get something else.
"Any kind of IT product should be able to communicate with any type of service in the future."
What does that even mean?
And if he's not happy with it, he should return it and get a different one.
If only there was a way that you could listen to a song before buying it, or read someone else's opinion about a movie before watching it. And if only there were free sources of music and movies to watch...
Probably something about how every time an alternative has been tried it has ended terribly with large losses of life and shitty living conditions for those who linger on.
It's their goddamn product. They can do whatever they want with it. There is ZERO reason why you must have a copy of Avatar or Eminim's CD. If you don't like how they're selling it, don't buy it. Buy something from someone else that does things how you like.
>IP rights holders want control of entertainment. They do not want free or cheap entertainment to exist.
Oh nonsense. First of all, you're lumping every rights holder into the same group. This is wrong. There are some groups that want money for their work, some that give it away, and some that are a mix of both. The major record companies fall into that first group. But there are plenty of independent artists that fall into the second and third groups.
>if the world worked the way their model proposes it should, if you don't have the money then you wouldn't be able to listen to music, watch movies, or play electronic games.
You mean "their" music, movies, and games. They have the right to control how their work is distributed, and they should have that right. But you also have the right not to support them and to seek out alternative music, movies, and games that are released for free.
The thing that bothers me most about people who hold views like yours is that you have to have it exactly your way. You'd force everyone to go copyleft instead of letting people pick and choose how they want to handle their IP. You feel entitled to other people's work, and if things were the way that you wanted them, artists would be the poorest lot out there. The big companies might be a bit overbearing when it comes to protecting their rights, but you'd be hard pressed to find any of their artists scrapping by for money. Sure, artists make most of their money on performances, but if their music wasn't being heavily promoted by these companies, no one would ever hear of them.
Wow, what a rant. Let's go through it point by point, shall we?
>"Because they'd rather you not listen to their music at all than let you download it."
So if they won't give it to you for free, that means you can't download it? And if you can't download it, there's no other way to listen to it? What about regular radio and internet radio like Pandora and LastFM? I guess they don't count.
>"This is about information control, and controlling who can and cannot be happy."
No, it's about control the rights to their IP. Are you telling me that you can't be happy unless you can download your Miley Cyrus songs for nothing? There is a ton of free/cheap indie music out there that is not owned by or published through a major record label. Why can't you listen to that?
>"It's also about profit margins."
Yeah, they're businesses. Their goal is to make money.
>"They should be finding a way to make money on ad revenue but instead they want to keep the old models even when the economy doesn't support it."
They're making money on those supposedly "old models", and there are ad-supported music distribution systems popping up all over the place.
>"Because they'd rather lock you up than hire you or give you a raise."
What? Who is "they" in this sentence? Your boss at your job wants to lock you up? Or are you referring to the music companies? That doesn't make any sense either...why would a music company be in charge of your salary?
>"If a college student budgets $200 to spend on movies and music for that year thats what he or she is going to spend."
Yeah...most college students have a budget of $0 and get their entertainment through torrents and sites like Hulu and Pandora.
>"As the economy is getting worse they keep upping the price of the music on itunes so that young people can afford less and less of it."
The price of everything is going up...it's called inflation. Why would you expect music prices to be immune to that? And who said the economy is getting worse? I've been job hunting (currently employed) and I've seen more jobs this year than in the last two years.
>"And the 3 strikes policy is completely unacceptable, ruin a persons livelihood because they downloaded some music they couldn't afford or didn't want to risk paying for"
If they can't afford it, tough. It's not a necessity to have mainstream music and movies, especially when so much free and legal content is available online. And what do you mean by "risk paying for it"? It seems more risky to not pay for something.
>"Find another strategy, not wait until an economic depression to crack down hard on all the poor jobless undergrads and recent grads unless they really want to make the the situation worse and make people desperate."
Are you serious? You're trying to tell us that if people get in trouble for violating copyright, that it's going to make the economy worse and people desperate? You do realize that you're talking about entertainment here, right? Not food or housing. Entertainment. Aka...something to do when you don't feel like doing anything. I think you are really dramatizing this a lot.
>"If sales figures are down it's because we have less disposable income. If people aren't buying music, movies or art it's because they are paying their bills."
Ok, but that doesn't mean that these companies should start giving away their stuff for free, nor does it give anyone else the right to take it for free.
Yeah. When I was going to highschool on the Oregon coast, we'd go to the beach and build huge bonfires (think logs that were anywhere from 6 inches to a foot thick). Once the center of the fire had built up some nice, red coals, we'd have someone toss an aerosol can in while the rest of us took cover behind a large driftwood log or a trench that we had dug out. The person doing the tossing had to run like hell to take cover before the explosion. Usually we were rewarded with a huge fireball and smoke of various colors depending on what we threw in (paint, WD-40, whatever we could find in our parents garages). We also tried a few mini-propane tanks. Those didn't fireball; they just blew our bonfire to smithereens and coated the beach in burning embers in a 100ft radius. As far as shrapnel goes, usually the bottom would blow off of the aerosol cans, and the propane tanks would split in half.
Sacrifices must be made for the furthering of SCIENCE!
When did you become entitled to use an iPhone 4? Get a different phone.
Most phones do that. My Samsung phone loses signal strength if I hold it a certain way. There was a whole thread on Reddit yesterday where people were confirming the same affect on dozens of different phones. This is nothing specific with the iPhone. People are just being retards like usual.
Meh, I'm not impressed with your example. If you bought the laptop and it didn't work out of the box, you could have taken it back. If you bought it and it failed during the warranty period, you could have had Apple fix it. If it failed outside the warranty, too bad. That's the time period that you agreed the device should be covered by Apple when you bought the thing.
The probability of any kid being a boy is 0.5. The gender and age of any of your other kids is irrelevant. You can keep playing number and word games if you like, but the question is "What's the probability that my other child is a boy?" It's 0.5.
"TFA does a pretty good job of explaining why people have such a hard time understanding this."
Yes, he admits that people have a hard time because it's bullshit: "The difficulty of these problems is rooted in their artificiality: In real life, we almost always know why the information was selected, whereas these problems have been devised to eliminate that knowledge."