Why is it that this gets modded flaimbait and the one below it gets modded up? This person explained their POV cleanly, and OK he bolded the words "baby murder" once, and did a little "fuzzy math" on the statistics (which he admitted to immediately after), but the one below is full of profanity and compares the taking of a live to the removal of an infected body part (which saves a life, by the way) and is modded up as insightful. Soudns to me like both have mis-statement, but one is at least admitting it. I think the political bias of slashbots is being shown here.
For the record, I'm pro-choice... I believe you make your choice when you put yourself at risk for pregnancy. After that you should take responsibility for your actions. Naturally, if the mother's life is at risk, there's a choice that has to be made and I won't fault anyone for choosing the life of the mother. Of course, there is the rape issue too, and I'm not 100% either way on this one. I'd hate to add to an already horrible situation, but I'd also hate to condone murder.
Yeah, I read his post and forgot we were in the middle of a D&D discussion and thought we were in the middle of another political discussion (of which there have been just too many lately). So I was think of "neutral" as someone who didn't care who won... Not a balance between...
I don't know about the rest of my generation, but I would vote against her. I'm very much against people expecting to be bailed out of everything because they screwed up.
Why all the fudge? Because it's not me making that descision. Personally, I like Harry Browne's stance on SS, but that's not the most important issue to me, and I agree with Bush more overall...
As for what you said before, I did read it... Let me quote: "Workers don't have a surplus to invest because their money is not an investment. The money workers pay is handed out to the retired of today." Afterwards you explain that there is a surplus if workers pay in more than is drawn and a deficit if the opposite occurs, but you don't say which is current.
Bush wants to have you pay only a percentage of what you pay now to SS and keep the rest in a private mandatory investment account.
Excuse me, but there's nothing mandatory about it. People will have the option to invest this money towards their retirement. Yes, this will deplete the surplus, but the interesting thing is that you say once that there is no surplus (completely false) and then say that this plan will deplete the surplus. Which is it? Besides, if the investing is done well, the return on investment will outpace the loss of surplus.
Stallman seems surprisingly ignorant. He has no idea what a console is and has never heard of the DirectX API.
Hehheh... About the time Stallman asked what a console was and claimed that the only consoles he knew of were terminals, I realized that once again I was in for a boring, pedantic Stallman ego-fest. Has he been living in a cave, shut off from technology since they started calling these gaming systems consoles?
When I worked at my university's public computer cluster, I had to repeatedly have a certain user removed for viewing porn. This was in a library. Just goes to show you that those people are out there. However, filters are a bad idea, and we really need PEOPLE to make sure that this stuff isn't going on rather than some list of blocked sites. The internet is way too dynamic for that.
Yeah, I took it too... It seems they think I'm a left-liberal. Funny tho - every other poll puts me as a fairly staunch conservative. I wonder how they can judge based on 10 questions that point very much to an extreme libertarian POV.
Re:This is nice - but what about other DRM systems
on
SDMI Cracked Too Soon
·
· Score: 1
I've always just run RealPlayer alongside a separate recording program such as Goldwave. It works like a charm.
A company publishes a software product riddled with bugs. Customers complain. The company's response is, "Well, look how much worse the other guy is! At least we let you see the source code!"
What compelling defense of RedHat 7.0 am I missing here?
Well, I think the defense of RedHat 7.0 is that not only do you get to see what the bugs are and see the source code, you (and every other user out there) can know exctly what holes and bugs to expect. Wouldn't you like to know what causes that BSOD on your windows box? How about knowing what holes have been found in your WinNT server? On top of all this, if there's a bug that you see in their list that you're REALLY uncomfortable with, you can change the code that is in front of you (it's really not just to look at you know), and fix it. If you don't know how, you can poke around on the internet and find someone else who's working on that bug.
Besides, much of the code in 7.0 is development level code, so there are bound to be some bugs. The idea with releasing it was to give people functionality if they want it. It not like you have to install every toy on the CD or FTP site.
when talking on their feet.
As soon as the word internet came out of Governor Bush's mouth, I could almost feel his aides and advisors cringing with me. I instantly knew we'd hear about it on slashdot today too. If you listened to the rest of the debate though, you'd realize that he talked about parenting and youth activities as ways to curb this violence, and didn't talk of censoring the internet.
If one slip of the toungue is all it takes to crush a candidate, we'd have no one left.
You haven't missed much. NBC is putting on the absolute worse broadcast of the Olympics that I have seen. They seem to think that we'd rather tune in to a sporting event to see hours of Austrailian history than the sports themselves. It has been so bad that this US station only showed under ten of the thirty US womens gymnastics performances in both the prelims and the finals. The other sports are covered in this same spotty manner.
The way it seems to work is that they are planning on giving away $10,000 for each of the 4 technologies if they are cracked. The hitches at 1) if you crack it you split the $10,000 with everyone who cracked that technology, and 2) Only UNIQUE cracks are eligable for the money. If you simply resample the music and submit it, you can bet that others will too, and you'll get nothing.
Then why not like music for the music and ignore the politics of the band? If I had to stop liking bands because of what they say and do, there are very few out there that I listen to that would ever find tehir way to my CD player. However, as long as I like the sounds coming off the CD, I'll buy it.
Much applause to Hemos for taking a neutral stance and giving MSNBC the benefit of the doubt. I seriously doubt that they would have done something so obvious when one half of the MS/NBC partnership so desperately needs to start reconstructing their image as a company that ISN'T cutthroat and unfair.
Back to the article, lest I'm marked as off-topic (Not that I give a fuck, mind you.) Yes, building a house with locks on the doors means it's gonna take a bit more time. It also means the FCC won't have to sue everybody's asses like what happened with Napster. How in hell can you condemn an industry for not making it incredibly easy to rip them off?
I agree to a large extent, but what about those times when there's something on that you want to watch, but you have to work? If the station says you can't tape it, then you're screwed. My wife wouldn't be too pleased if suddenly she couldn't tape As the World Turns, and I wouldn't be to amused if I suddenly couldn't tape Buffy on nights that I'm unavailable to watch it. And no, I don't have a lage collection of Buffy tapes that I've held onto. I do just tape to watch and then tape over (movies from HBO and PPV are a diffent story, I'll admit).
There's a fundamental differance between what radio does and what mp3.com was doing. That being that radio broadcasts to anyone within listening difference, regardless of whether they have the CD or not. Mp3.com required the listener to have the CD. Therefore, a better similarity would be comparing it to using the actual CD rather than the radio. If you're listening to the CD, no royalties are paid (after the initial payment to buy the disc - which has already been paid in this case).
The only problems with the mp3.com technology that should have landed them in legal trouble would be if they put no effort into security. Having never tried to crack it myself, I can't say one way or the other. Another potential hotspot would be that people could borrow a CD from a friend once, throw it in the computer and make mp3.com believe that they owned it. These two problems could (notice I don't say "would") lead to lost sales, but not to lost royalties.
Maybe I should point out that what I'm referring to as my idea of free software is based on things that RMS himself has said. I dissagree with the guy on many things, but when he talks of what free software is, I do agree with him. Now he's going against everything he's fought for by saying that even though they've gone and corrected the things they've done wrong in the past, the KDE developers have forfeitted their rights. In using the arguments he's using, RMS is now restricting the rights he's fought to protect, and un-freeing the software, and free software is the whole point of his license.
Damn good question. I have a feeling it's strictly a way of developers distancing themselves from RMS himself. Personally, I find him very disagreeable (all this crap about KDE developers having forfeitted their rights to certain GPL code is bogus - it completely goes against my idea of "free" software), and I can't blame people for not wanting to license things under something other than his license. At the same time, all these conflicts are going to kill the whole idea of free (speach) software because people aren't going to have the vast libraries of code under a conflicting license.
I now propse my own generic license:
I. Do whatever the hell you want with this code providing that you:
i. release the source to any binaries you make public
ii. give credit to the original author(s) by listing their names in a "CREDITS" file distibuted with every copy of the program.
Now, I'm waiting for the legions of flames telling me how unenforcable this is, but folks, this is freedom.
So why is it that RMS is now saying that because of a previous (possible) transgression that has now been fixed, the KDE dvelopers may have forfeited their rights to this GPL'd code? Seems to me like he's trying to secure the code in a not-so-free way.
License conflicts be damned... If someone realeases their code in an open manner, others should be able to use that code in any open manner they want!
Does he make any money off of the auctions? It didn't look that way (can't tell now - it's slashdotted (of course)). If he doesn't, then there really isn't an issue there.
Not really... Someone (whoever is selling the auctioned goods) is making money... Therefor it is considered commercial. At least it would have been where I went to school.
As for his rip-off of the design, I think it's very hippocritical of Slashdot to rail him for it, but I do think that at the very least the graphics are property. The layout might be too, but it's kind of become standard for people to rip off pieces of code from other web pages, and you end up with a lot of similar looking stuff.
Ah, but that reasoning depends on the great debate over whether Intellectual Property exists. I know slashdot is full of people who think property has to be tangible, but fortunately the world in general recognises Intellectual Property. Under this thinking, natural law does protect one's rights to ideas, speech, code, music, etc.
Ripped-Off: An individual forced to pay more for a CD than a casette (even considering any possible differnce in manufacturing cost)
Well, that's your choice... You can still buy cassettes of any popular recording. The only companies I know of that are only putting out CDs are indie lables.
Also, there is the higher quality sound and better shelf life you get from CDs that add to the value.
People out there already got their chance... They were the ones who (for a day at least) were able to buy anything at Best Buy, get the $400 MSN rebate, and then cancel the MSN service with no penalty. And now they also get the class action suit?
Slashdot Mirror
Why is it that this gets modded flaimbait and the one below it gets modded up? This person explained their POV cleanly, and OK he bolded the words "baby murder" once, and did a little "fuzzy math" on the statistics (which he admitted to immediately after), but the one below is full of profanity and compares the taking of a live to the removal of an infected body part (which saves a life, by the way) and is modded up as insightful. Soudns to me like both have mis-statement, but one is at least admitting it. I think the political bias of slashbots is being shown here.
For the record, I'm pro-choice... I believe you make your choice when you put yourself at risk for pregnancy. After that you should take responsibility for your actions. Naturally, if the mother's life is at risk, there's a choice that has to be made and I won't fault anyone for choosing the life of the mother. Of course, there is the rape issue too, and I'm not 100% either way on this one. I'd hate to add to an already horrible situation, but I'd also hate to condone murder.
-
Yeah, I read his post and forgot we were in the middle of a D&D discussion and thought we were in the middle of another political discussion (of which there have been just too many lately). So I was think of "neutral" as someone who didn't care who won... Not a balance between...
-
Then they cease being neutral unless they can get another neutral to vote for the winning candidate (assuming a two party system, which we are not).
-
I don't know about the rest of my generation, but I would vote against her. I'm very much against people expecting to be bailed out of everything because they screwed up.
Why all the fudge? Because it's not me making that descision. Personally, I like Harry Browne's stance on SS, but that's not the most important issue to me, and I agree with Bush more overall...
As for what you said before, I did read it... Let me quote: "Workers don't have a surplus to invest because their money is not an investment. The money workers pay is handed out to the retired of today." Afterwards you explain that there is a surplus if workers pay in more than is drawn and a deficit if the opposite occurs, but you don't say which is current.
Bush wants to have you pay only a percentage of what you pay now to SS and keep the rest in a private mandatory investment account.
Excuse me, but there's nothing mandatory about it. People will have the option to invest this money towards their retirement. Yes, this will deplete the surplus, but the interesting thing is that you say once that there is no surplus (completely false) and then say that this plan will deplete the surplus. Which is it? Besides, if the investing is done well, the return on investment will outpace the loss of surplus.
Stallman seems surprisingly ignorant. He has no idea what a console is and has never heard of the DirectX API.
Hehheh... About the time Stallman asked what a console was and claimed that the only consoles he knew of were terminals, I realized that once again I was in for a boring, pedantic Stallman ego-fest. Has he been living in a cave, shut off from technology since they started calling these gaming systems consoles?
When I worked at my university's public computer cluster, I had to repeatedly have a certain user removed for viewing porn. This was in a library. Just goes to show you that those people are out there. However, filters are a bad idea, and we really need PEOPLE to make sure that this stuff isn't going on rather than some list of blocked sites. The internet is way too dynamic for that.
Yeah, I took it too... It seems they think I'm a left-liberal. Funny tho - every other poll puts me as a fairly staunch conservative. I wonder how they can judge based on 10 questions that point very much to an extreme libertarian POV.
I've always just run RealPlayer alongside a separate recording program such as Goldwave. It works like a charm.
A company publishes a software product riddled with bugs. Customers complain. The company's response is, "Well, look how much worse the other guy is! At least we let you see the source code!"
What compelling defense of RedHat 7.0 am I missing here?
Well, I think the defense of RedHat 7.0 is that not only do you get to see what the bugs are and see the source code, you (and every other user out there) can know exctly what holes and bugs to expect. Wouldn't you like to know what causes that BSOD on your windows box? How about knowing what holes have been found in your WinNT server? On top of all this, if there's a bug that you see in their list that you're REALLY uncomfortable with, you can change the code that is in front of you (it's really not just to look at you know), and fix it. If you don't know how, you can poke around on the internet and find someone else who's working on that bug.
Besides, much of the code in 7.0 is development level code, so there are bound to be some bugs. The idea with releasing it was to give people functionality if they want it. It not like you have to install every toy on the CD or FTP site.
when talking on their feet.
As soon as the word internet came out of Governor Bush's mouth, I could almost feel his aides and advisors cringing with me. I instantly knew we'd hear about it on slashdot today too. If you listened to the rest of the debate though, you'd realize that he talked about parenting and youth activities as ways to curb this violence, and didn't talk of censoring the internet.
If one slip of the toungue is all it takes to crush a candidate, we'd have no one left.
You haven't missed much. NBC is putting on the absolute worse broadcast of the Olympics that I have seen. They seem to think that we'd rather tune in to a sporting event to see hours of Austrailian history than the sports themselves. It has been so bad that this US station only showed under ten of the thirty US womens gymnastics performances in both the prelims and the finals. The other sports are covered in this same spotty manner.
The way it seems to work is that they are planning on giving away $10,000 for each of the 4 technologies if they are cracked. The hitches at 1) if you crack it you split the $10,000 with everyone who cracked that technology, and 2) Only UNIQUE cracks are eligable for the money. If you simply resample the music and submit it, you can bet that others will too, and you'll get nothing.
Then why not like music for the music and ignore the politics of the band? If I had to stop liking bands because of what they say and do, there are very few out there that I listen to that would ever find tehir way to my CD player. However, as long as I like the sounds coming off the CD, I'll buy it.
Much applause to Hemos for taking a neutral stance and giving MSNBC the benefit of the doubt. I seriously doubt that they would have done something so obvious when one half of the MS/NBC partnership so desperately needs to start reconstructing their image as a company that ISN'T cutthroat and unfair.
Back to the article, lest I'm marked as off-topic (Not that I give a fuck, mind you.) Yes, building a house with locks on the doors means it's gonna take a bit more time. It also means the FCC won't have to sue everybody's asses like what happened with Napster. How in hell can you condemn an industry for not making it incredibly easy to rip them off?
I agree to a large extent, but what about those times when there's something on that you want to watch, but you have to work? If the station says you can't tape it, then you're screwed. My wife wouldn't be too pleased if suddenly she couldn't tape As the World Turns, and I wouldn't be to amused if I suddenly couldn't tape Buffy on nights that I'm unavailable to watch it. And no, I don't have a lage collection of Buffy tapes that I've held onto. I do just tape to watch and then tape over (movies from HBO and PPV are a diffent story, I'll admit).
There's a fundamental differance between what radio does and what mp3.com was doing. That being that radio broadcasts to anyone within listening difference, regardless of whether they have the CD or not. Mp3.com required the listener to have the CD. Therefore, a better similarity would be comparing it to using the actual CD rather than the radio. If you're listening to the CD, no royalties are paid (after the initial payment to buy the disc - which has already been paid in this case).
The only problems with the mp3.com technology that should have landed them in legal trouble would be if they put no effort into security. Having never tried to crack it myself, I can't say one way or the other. Another potential hotspot would be that people could borrow a CD from a friend once, throw it in the computer and make mp3.com believe that they owned it. These two problems could (notice I don't say "would") lead to lost sales, but not to lost royalties.
Maybe I should point out that what I'm referring to as my idea of free software is based on things that RMS himself has said. I dissagree with the guy on many things, but when he talks of what free software is, I do agree with him. Now he's going against everything he's fought for by saying that even though they've gone and corrected the things they've done wrong in the past, the KDE developers have forfeitted their rights. In using the arguments he's using, RMS is now restricting the rights he's fought to protect, and un-freeing the software, and free software is the whole point of his license.
Damn good question. I have a feeling it's strictly a way of developers distancing themselves from RMS himself. Personally, I find him very disagreeable (all this crap about KDE developers having forfeitted their rights to certain GPL code is bogus - it completely goes against my idea of "free" software), and I can't blame people for not wanting to license things under something other than his license. At the same time, all these conflicts are going to kill the whole idea of free (speach) software because people aren't going to have the vast libraries of code under a conflicting license.
I now propse my own generic license:
I. Do whatever the hell you want with this code providing that you:
i. release the source to any binaries you make public
ii. give credit to the original author(s) by listing their names in a "CREDITS" file distibuted with every copy of the program.
Now, I'm waiting for the legions of flames telling me how unenforcable this is, but folks, this is freedom.
So why is it that RMS is now saying that because of a previous (possible) transgression that has now been fixed, the KDE dvelopers may have forfeited their rights to this GPL'd code? Seems to me like he's trying to secure the code in a not-so-free way.
License conflicts be damned... If someone realeases their code in an open manner, others should be able to use that code in any open manner they want!
Does he make any money off of the auctions? It didn't look that way (can't tell now - it's slashdotted (of course)). If he doesn't, then there really isn't an issue there.
Not really... Someone (whoever is selling the auctioned goods) is making money... Therefor it is considered commercial. At least it would have been where I went to school.
As for his rip-off of the design, I think it's very hippocritical of Slashdot to rail him for it, but I do think that at the very least the graphics are property. The layout might be too, but it's kind of become standard for people to rip off pieces of code from other web pages, and you end up with a lot of similar looking stuff.
Not worried about your privacy, yet you still post as Anonymous Coward... Hmmm... =)
Ah, but that reasoning depends on the great debate over whether Intellectual Property exists. I know slashdot is full of people who think property has to be tangible, but fortunately the world in general recognises Intellectual Property. Under this thinking, natural law does protect one's rights to ideas, speech, code, music, etc.
Ripped-Off: An individual forced to pay more for a CD than a casette (even considering any possible differnce in manufacturing cost)
Well, that's your choice... You can still buy cassettes of any popular recording. The only companies I know of that are only putting out CDs are indie lables.
Also, there is the higher quality sound and better shelf life you get from CDs that add to the value.
People out there already got their chance... They were the ones who (for a day at least) were able to buy anything at Best Buy, get the $400 MSN rebate, and then cancel the MSN service with no penalty. And now they also get the class action suit?