When will the record companies learn, if they price there product in an affordable price range, people will buy.
While I agree music is overpriced and the musicians undercompensated, it's still not a reason to download the songs illegally. It's like walking into a Wal-Mart, stuffing something in your coat, walking out, and justifying it by saying that they charge too much anyway. Stealing is stealing.
The music companies are totally right in doing this. It IS their property, and people don't have the right to use it for free. Go use Napster or iTunes if you don't want to buy cds.
I would be surprised if they put it in the public domain, because then competitors could use it for closed source projects.
It depends on what they are releasing. They probably aren't going to release anything that would give another company an edge over them. I doubt they're that dumb. It'll more likely be some non-importnat pieces of code for users to poke around with.
What if the Dutch guy just likes the said candidate and spams without permission? Is the FEC going to fine/punish the candidate without proof of involvement?
Ok, I'm about as conservative as they come, but I would really like to see governments keep their damn hands out of censorship or regulating any kind of media. If people want to watch BBC's biased coverage, GOOD! Let them. If there's a demand for something else, another station will fill it. It's the same as the senator guy from Alaska wanting to regulate cable and satellites. I say leave it all alone and let the media market self-regulate.
DON'T go to college. Get a job and save money. Travel for a year or two. Get to know people. Listen to the elderly. Volunteer somewhere. Make a library a second home. Fix your car yourself. Cook your food yourself. Find someone to love.
That's how you learn anything of value.
When you're ready for a new job, then you can go to college.
It's like the people in certain areas who want "intelligen design" to be taught instead of Darwin's scientifically viable theory of evolution. They say things like, "We don't belive Darwin 'round these parts, so we don't want it taught in our schools!" That's great if you're an ignorant redneck, but it doesn't make it right.
And it doesn't make it wrong either. Just because you have an anti-religious bias doesn't make the intelligent design argument any less scientifically viable than evolution. We know a minute fraction of what there is to know in this universe, and who are you, or much less anyone else, to say what is correct and what is incorrect? We may well someday find there there is a higher being that designed everything. There are a fair amount of scientists that believe this. Don't let your arrogance promote ignorance.
I'll keep my mind open on the matter. So should you.
Wikipedia has a danger of being (or at least becoming) extremely biased, not necessarily for ideological reasons, but through simply through public ignorance.
The funny thing about historical "facts" is that they are so...dependent. No one alive today witnessed anything that happened before the 1900's (unless we have some really old 105+ yr old people around) We depend on the accounts of others to derive facts about the past. We can only hope that they were being accurate and truthful.
Really, one could argue that facts are indeed a democracy, as when we look at historical accounts, we choose the one that is best collaborated by others' accounts. Majority rules.
I agree. It really doesn't make sense for them to have a song played any more than any other one. It's not like playing a song you already own more often is going to make you purchase something. It's not like advertisement...you already have it.
1. People think there's patterns on the iPod shuffle 2. Apple says there isn't 3. The math guy says there probably isn' 4. People tend to look for patterns
BAH. They should give you $35, cuz when you call in and you've broken something, they charge you $35 (unless it's a pro version or corporate, then it's in the hundreds). If it's something broken/lost becuase of them, they should pay you $35 .
I don't know how good of IT stuff this is...seems more like this dude's gf got her hands on some HD's and didn't know what to do with them, so she...well, you saw that article.
One of the computer labs at the school I was going to had the ceiling covered with old harddrive platters. There were also a bunch hanging down...it looked pretty sweet. I was wondering how hard it would be to tile a whole room in them...I think it would look awsome...all shiny n' stuff.
If you want to live under a fundamentalist government, then why don't you move to Iran already rather than trying to fuck up the primary thing that made this country great?
I'm just saying that if my religious beliefs can't be federally funded, then why should someone else's be? And saying that a human embryo is not life IS a dogmatic religious belief.
Oh yeah, and morality/character made this country great. Not the whole, "If it feels good, it's ok!" attitude.
And don't kid yourself that a Christian theocracy would be any better than a Muslim one. If It would, I'm sure you could point to one hmmmm???
Armenia is an officially christian nation...they are democratic, though they seem to be having some trouble similar to the Ukrain during their last election.
BTW, I resent your anti-christian views. Perhaps you should get to know one before judging.
Why is the left so dead set on using embryonic stem cells? Do they like the idea of slaughtering unborn humans to do research? They call us (christians, conservatives, red staters...choose your term)dogmatic in not allowing it, but they are wildly advocating something that hasn't produced a single treatment. THAT is dogmatic.
Why not push for research using non-embryonic stem cells? It's safe, not controversial, and has had quite a bit of success so far.
Think of it this way. You probably don't want govt mone going to religious causes. Like if my church wants to open a bible school, you wouldn't like it if they got federal money. On hte other hand, I don't like the idea of a belief that says fetal life is there for the harvesting to get federal money.
Let them do the embrionic research elsewhere than the US. If my tax dollars can't go toward a religious cause I support, then I don't want them going to another religious cause that I don't support, namely, one that says embryos are not life.
Slashdot Mirror
I would imagine yes. How could you prove that it wasn't you who downloaded the files? It would be a good idea to block p2p ports on your router.
When will the record companies learn, if they price there product in an affordable price range, people will buy.
While I agree music is overpriced and the musicians undercompensated, it's still not a reason to download the songs illegally. It's like walking into a Wal-Mart, stuffing something in your coat, walking out, and justifying it by saying that they charge too much anyway. Stealing is stealing.
The music companies are totally right in doing this. It IS their property, and people don't have the right to use it for free. Go use Napster or iTunes if you don't want to buy cds.
I would be surprised if they put it in the public domain, because then competitors could use it for closed source projects. It depends on what they are releasing. They probably aren't going to release anything that would give another company an edge over them. I doubt they're that dumb. It'll more likely be some non-importnat pieces of code for users to poke around with.
What if the Dutch guy just likes the said candidate and spams without permission? Is the FEC going to fine/punish the candidate without proof of involvement?
But is this an attempt by them to be nice, or is it just a PR move?
Ok, I'm about as conservative as they come, but I would really like to see governments keep their damn hands out of censorship or regulating any kind of media. If people want to watch BBC's biased coverage, GOOD! Let them. If there's a demand for something else, another station will fill it. It's the same as the senator guy from Alaska wanting to regulate cable and satellites. I say leave it all alone and let the media market self-regulate.
DON'T go to college. Get a job and save money. Travel for a year or two. Get to know people. Listen to the elderly. Volunteer somewhere. Make a library a second home. Fix your car yourself. Cook your food yourself. Find someone to love.
That's how you learn anything of value.
When you're ready for a new job, then you can go to college.
It's like the people in certain areas who want "intelligen design" to be taught instead of Darwin's scientifically viable theory of evolution. They say things like, "We don't belive Darwin 'round these parts, so we don't want it taught in our schools!" That's great if you're an ignorant redneck, but it doesn't make it right.
And it doesn't make it wrong either. Just because you have an anti-religious bias doesn't make the intelligent design argument any less scientifically viable than evolution. We know a minute fraction of what there is to know in this universe, and who are you, or much less anyone else, to say what is correct and what is incorrect? We may well someday find there there is a higher being that designed everything. There are a fair amount of scientists that believe this. Don't let your arrogance promote ignorance.
I'll keep my mind open on the matter. So should you.
Wikipedia has a danger of being (or at least becoming) extremely biased, not necessarily for ideological reasons, but through simply through public ignorance.
The funny thing about historical "facts" is that they are so...dependent. No one alive today witnessed anything that happened before the 1900's (unless we have some really old 105+ yr old people around) We depend on the accounts of others to derive facts about the past. We can only hope that they were being accurate and truthful.
Really, one could argue that facts are indeed a democracy, as when we look at historical accounts, we choose the one that is best collaborated by others' accounts. Majority rules.
Combine this statement and your sig and a trend becomes apparent. You MAY be conservative. No no no, I AM a conservative.
Flamebait! You guys need to unbury your senses of humor. There was no ill intention behind that at all. =(
I don't know. I seem to always listen to the same old stuff because I like it. I don't seem to get tired of it. Maybe I'm weird.
I agree. It really doesn't make sense for them to have a song played any more than any other one. It's not like playing a song you already own more often is going to make you purchase something. It's not like advertisement...you already have it.
It IS an interesting story. And there are facts.
1. People think there's patterns on the iPod shuffle
2. Apple says there isn't
3. The math guy says there probably isn'
4. People tend to look for patterns
I have heard YMCA an inordinate amount of times on my ipod shuffle. I wonder what that means.
Well I have been told by my anti-Mac friends that the iPod was gay...
I didn't think about that. But my computer is next to a big window, and when hte glare gets to be too much, I just close the drapes.
Solar power can be used to create electricity!
Do you really think that Microsoft with all it's lawyers would let something like that slip through?
BAH. They should give you $35, cuz when you call in and you've broken something, they charge you $35 (unless it's a pro version or corporate, then it's in the hundreds). If it's something broken/lost becuase of them, they should pay you $35 .
I don't know how good of IT stuff this is...seems more like this dude's gf got her hands on some HD's and didn't know what to do with them, so she...well, you saw that article.
One of the computer labs at the school I was going to had the ceiling covered with old harddrive platters. There were also a bunch hanging down...it looked pretty sweet. I was wondering how hard it would be to tile a whole room in them...I think it would look awsome...all shiny n' stuff.
If you want to live under a fundamentalist government, then why don't you move to Iran already rather than trying to fuck up the primary thing that made this country great?
I'm just saying that if my religious beliefs can't be federally funded, then why should someone else's be? And saying that a human embryo is not life IS a dogmatic religious belief.
Oh yeah, and morality/character made this country great. Not the whole, "If it feels good, it's ok!" attitude.
And don't kid yourself that a Christian theocracy would be any better than a Muslim one. If It would, I'm sure you could point to one hmmmm???
Armenia is an officially christian nation...they are democratic, though they seem to be having some trouble similar to the Ukrain during their last election.
BTW, I resent your anti-christian views. Perhaps you should get to know one before judging.
Why is the left so dead set on using embryonic stem cells? Do they like the idea of slaughtering unborn humans to do research? They call us (christians, conservatives, red staters...choose your term)dogmatic in not allowing it, but they are wildly advocating something that hasn't produced a single treatment. THAT is dogmatic.
Why not push for research using non-embryonic stem cells? It's safe, not controversial, and has had quite a bit of success so far.
I don't get it.
Think of it this way. You probably don't want govt mone going to religious causes. Like if my church wants to open a bible school, you wouldn't like it if they got federal money. On hte other hand, I don't like the idea of a belief that says fetal life is there for the harvesting to get federal money.
Let them do the embrionic research elsewhere than the US. If my tax dollars can't go toward a religious cause I support, then I don't want them going to another religious cause that I don't support, namely, one that says embryos are not life.
(This is not a reply to the parent post)