Anyone who uses Windows knows that if you want to find something about a problem, you often have to go through several loops to get there and spend plenty of time weeding through the confusion and plethora of data. [never thought I'd use 'plethora' naturally in conversation, but whatever] If finding solutions to Linux problems requires more work than finding solutions for Windows problems (ie - not "looking hard enough") then forget it. It's not worth the extra labotomies...
First off, I'm sure it's occured to someone that the species living in Africa and Asia, aren't exactly the same as the ones that lived in North-America. You could bring them over, and they'd probably do alright in some places...but they'd be populations of african lions...not north-american lions.
Second, while we have seen a turn back from extinction for many species in the US, we are FAR from being able to declare that they are booming! Grizzly bears are not showing great improvement, and neither are the elk. Wolves are having major problems. Our efforts to re-introduce large herds of bison have seen minimal success at best.
And though off topic, our smaller wildlife, fish, and marine species, are going in the crapper faster than we can count.
In short, introducing new critters to North-America, no matter what their species history, is not the solution to the problem.
This is like having a bathtub with a hole in it. Instead of fixing the hole, we're just pouring in more water.
"...but they never hunted elephants to extinction."...Uh...there's a large number of ecologists around the world that might have a few things to say about that.
Nah, he's spot on. Humans may be the dominant preditor in the world, but we're also the only species that actively supports our own genetic and physical destruction. Not to mention that unchecked, we will eventually wipe ourselves out by our own habits of civilization. Either way, you can't cheat the fate of species. Eventually we will reach the "point of self-nix" and snuff it.
Well, first off "mega-fauna" is like the opposite of mice and beetles and ferrets and little critters. Cheetahs would be mega-fauna because they are a relatively large dominant preditor high in the food chain.
Second....dinosaurs? Introduce? Dude...if they had dinosaurs to introduce..they can introduce them anywhere they damn please. It'd be a miracle.
These species did not go away because of some kind of climate change or disease or a new species of their kind...These creatures were pushed to extinction directly by man, and indirectly by man's expansion into their habitat. This is not natural selection.
True, we're all well aware of the realities of 3rd-world support. However, indirectly, this would be a huge benifit to organizations battling things out in those 3rd-world countries. Such as the Red-Cross. Imagine if they could gain a cheap source of food, regardless of its eventual distribution problems. The Red-Cross requires tons of money and donations to purchase the food they give out. If you could slash those costs, it'd be great.
Cool beans. That's pretty sweet. Wonder if they'll be able to build something like an eagle's eye that can see both macroscopic and microscopic extremes. That'd be sweet.
Now we can ship mass quantities of synthetic meat to the 3rd-world countries (thus solving part of world hunger and getting them to shut up), and keep all the home-grown meat for us.
So because parents refuse to PARENT THEIR OWN KIDS...we have to put up with more and more freaking rating crap.
You know, when are they going to enact a law that says not parenting your children is aliken to child abuse?
BTW, I was reading the ratings on the back of one of my DVDs at home, and one of the reasons it got its rating was because of something called "Brief Language". WTF is 'brief language'??? Who the fk came up with these dumbass rating categories?
Microsoft has a not-so-reputable past, perhaps, but at least they are making clear efforts to bring about change.
Like you said, no company is perfect. This goes for OS's, too. Anyone who claims Linux is perfect, is a damn fool and knows it. Trouble is, due to MS's wide user base, and the fact that most places downplay anything negative about Linux, has lead to MS's problems being continually headlined. It's like a world full of idiots turning minor problems into 9/11-style ordeals.
And honestly, anyone who spends their life causing damage to others (regardless of the existance of the ability to do so), deserves to get a beating.
1. You can have a picture of your computer, but you can't promote it. You cannot print a picture of a Dell in a published work (like a computer magazine) without permission from Dell (ie - every time WIRED magazine wants to focus on a Dell machine, they have to do so under an agreement from Dell). Also, by altering your machine or putting a different OS on it, you have violated the maintenance agreement. They won't "go after" you, but they won't support you anymore. That's the contract you signed when you bought it.
2. The FedEx logo is a registered trademark of FedEx, with all rights reserved. If FedEx has reserved the right for people to use their logo in "art" (which is what this amounts to, I suppose), then guess what? It may be something little, and usually isn't bait enough for anyone to care, but that is for the company to decide. I can't just get some clay, make a copy of the Lockheed-Martin logo, and stick it up somewhere on a bus-stop or whatever. In the end, FedEx may not have the right to lay claim over the use of their boxes, but they do have the right to yay or nay the use of their logo. The case may turn out to be nothing but a lot of hot air, but that's beside the point.
"It's a sad reality that in our current society the only way to sell lots of music is to get signed by a major label..."
It's not sad at all. That's what the labels do! The labels maintain contact with vendors in the market. If you want the whole country to have your CDs on all the music-store shelves, you go to a distributor that does that. No band has the ability to distribute and promote themselves nationwide/worldwide all by themselves. They need a label to do this for them. That's why they go into contract with a label.
Signing with a major record label is a big thing if you're in a band. Taking the time to seriously go over the situation is definately called for.
If the bands see something going on they think is a breach of contract on the label's part, they have the right to persue legal actions (such as finding a lawyer to investigate). Too often the labels get away with stuff because the bands don't stick up for themselves.
This guy has no money, yet he's got enough FedEx packages to make furniture, has a website, and a digital camera....
???...
Okay, first off, furniture just ain't that freaking expensive. No, you may not be able to afford an Itallian leather sofa, but you can get a decent cloth loveseat from IKEA or Target for like $100. Chairs and tables are butt cheap. Furthermore, you can find much cheaper furniture from yard sales and such. WTF do you think college kids do? Do you think they have $1000 sofas in their dorms? Hell no. So honestly, get a freaking life and a clue. He probably spent at least 3 chairs and a table's worth of money on tape!
Second, if this guy made the furniture so that the FedEx logo shows, and published the pics to a website, FedEx has every right to go after him (by all legal means).
The bands got themselves into the mess. The record labels are sly, and they know their legal stuff, but that's no excuse for stupidity on the part of the signer(s).
If the contract says "You agree to distribute EXCLUSIVELY through Sony," well then guess what that means?
The record labels are in business to distribute. When you sign with them, your agreement to exclusively distribute with them is one of the first things on the page. If the band isn't okay with that, they shouldn't have signed. That's the bottom line.
ZDNet UK, my hat goes off to you. That has to be one of the best examples of rhetoric sarcasm I've seen in a company response in a long time! Nice middle finger up to Google, lol.
And here I thought companies didn't know how to be so slick.
Good idea. Sign contract, but when you don't like contract, breach contract.
I wonder if any of them tried resolving this legally/civily/maturely before blowing up? Would be very nice to know what kind of dialog went on between the band and the label before they jumped off the cliff (if any). Did Sony know the band was concerned about this, or is this whole affair gonna look like some 1960's hippie revolt?
Slashdot Mirror
ROFL!!! Hey, can do, pal!
'aren't looking hard enough.'
Anyone who uses Windows knows that if you want to find something about a problem, you often have to go through several loops to get there and spend plenty of time weeding through the confusion and plethora of data. [never thought I'd use 'plethora' naturally in conversation, but whatever] If finding solutions to Linux problems requires more work than finding solutions for Windows problems (ie - not "looking hard enough") then forget it. It's not worth the extra labotomies...
No, I'm saying that if ecologists and environmentalists around the globe had not done anything, yes, the elephants in Africa would be extinct.
Sure, they'd still be sitting there twidling their thumbs, but they'd be doing it for cheaper.
Yes yes...but CAN they carry coconuts?
First off, I'm sure it's occured to someone that the species living in Africa and Asia, aren't exactly the same as the ones that lived in North-America. You could bring them over, and they'd probably do alright in some places...but they'd be populations of african lions...not north-american lions.
Second, while we have seen a turn back from extinction for many species in the US, we are FAR from being able to declare that they are booming! Grizzly bears are not showing great improvement, and neither are the elk. Wolves are having major problems. Our efforts to re-introduce large herds of bison have seen minimal success at best.
And though off topic, our smaller wildlife, fish, and marine species, are going in the crapper faster than we can count.
In short, introducing new critters to North-America, no matter what their species history, is not the solution to the problem.
This is like having a bathtub with a hole in it. Instead of fixing the hole, we're just pouring in more water.
"...but they never hunted elephants to extinction." ...Uh...there's a large number of ecologists around the world that might have a few things to say about that.
Nah, he's spot on. Humans may be the dominant preditor in the world, but we're also the only species that actively supports our own genetic and physical destruction. Not to mention that unchecked, we will eventually wipe ourselves out by our own habits of civilization. Either way, you can't cheat the fate of species. Eventually we will reach the "point of self-nix" and snuff it.
Well, first off "mega-fauna" is like the opposite of mice and beetles and ferrets and little critters. Cheetahs would be mega-fauna because they are a relatively large dominant preditor high in the food chain.
Second....dinosaurs? Introduce? Dude...if they had dinosaurs to introduce..they can introduce them anywhere they damn please. It'd be a miracle.
"Most of the places in the US that would have room for herds of large animals also have nasty winters."
Need I remind you of the buffalo?
These species did not go away because of some kind of climate change or disease or a new species of their kind...These creatures were pushed to extinction directly by man, and indirectly by man's expansion into their habitat. This is not natural selection.
True, we're all well aware of the realities of 3rd-world support. However, indirectly, this would be a huge benifit to organizations battling things out in those 3rd-world countries. Such as the Red-Cross. Imagine if they could gain a cheap source of food, regardless of its eventual distribution problems. The Red-Cross requires tons of money and donations to purchase the food they give out. If you could slash those costs, it'd be great.
Cool beans. That's pretty sweet. Wonder if they'll be able to build something like an eagle's eye that can see both macroscopic and microscopic extremes. That'd be sweet.
Now we can ship mass quantities of synthetic meat to the 3rd-world countries (thus solving part of world hunger and getting them to shut up), and keep all the home-grown meat for us.
Sounds like win-win.
So because parents refuse to PARENT THEIR OWN KIDS...we have to put up with more and more freaking rating crap.
You know, when are they going to enact a law that says not parenting your children is aliken to child abuse?
BTW, I was reading the ratings on the back of one of my DVDs at home, and one of the reasons it got its rating was because of something called "Brief Language". WTF is 'brief language'??? Who the fk came up with these dumbass rating categories?
Agreed.
Microsoft has a not-so-reputable past, perhaps, but at least they are making clear efforts to bring about change.
Like you said, no company is perfect. This goes for OS's, too. Anyone who claims Linux is perfect, is a damn fool and knows it. Trouble is, due to MS's wide user base, and the fact that most places downplay anything negative about Linux, has lead to MS's problems being continually headlined. It's like a world full of idiots turning minor problems into 9/11-style ordeals.
And honestly, anyone who spends their life causing damage to others (regardless of the existance of the ability to do so), deserves to get a beating.
That's all I'm saying. I'm surprised this news was allowed in here...This kind of stuff isn't favorable in Slashdot.
Yet another company chooses to make their own decisions, rather than fall to blindfold propoganda! Cool beans.
Agreed. Looks like yet another company climbed on top of the Linux-Wall and took a look at the whole picture.
Not to iterate again, but:
1. You can have a picture of your computer, but you can't promote it. You cannot print a picture of a Dell in a published work (like a computer magazine) without permission from Dell (ie - every time WIRED magazine wants to focus on a Dell machine, they have to do so under an agreement from Dell). Also, by altering your machine or putting a different OS on it, you have violated the maintenance agreement. They won't "go after" you, but they won't support you anymore. That's the contract you signed when you bought it.
2. The FedEx logo is a registered trademark of FedEx, with all rights reserved. If FedEx has reserved the right for people to use their logo in "art" (which is what this amounts to, I suppose), then guess what? It may be something little, and usually isn't bait enough for anyone to care, but that is for the company to decide. I can't just get some clay, make a copy of the Lockheed-Martin logo, and stick it up somewhere on a bus-stop or whatever. In the end, FedEx may not have the right to lay claim over the use of their boxes, but they do have the right to yay or nay the use of their logo. The case may turn out to be nothing but a lot of hot air, but that's beside the point.
"It's a sad reality that in our current society the only way to sell lots of music is to get signed by a major label..."
It's not sad at all. That's what the labels do! The labels maintain contact with vendors in the market. If you want the whole country to have your CDs on all the music-store shelves, you go to a distributor that does that. No band has the ability to distribute and promote themselves nationwide/worldwide all by themselves. They need a label to do this for them. That's why they go into contract with a label.
Signing with a major record label is a big thing if you're in a band. Taking the time to seriously go over the situation is definately called for.
If the bands see something going on they think is a breach of contract on the label's part, they have the right to persue legal actions (such as finding a lawyer to investigate). Too often the labels get away with stuff because the bands don't stick up for themselves.
Wait, let me get this straight...
This guy has no money, yet he's got enough FedEx packages to make furniture, has a website, and a digital camera....
???...
Okay, first off, furniture just ain't that freaking expensive. No, you may not be able to afford an Itallian leather sofa, but you can get a decent cloth loveseat from IKEA or Target for like $100. Chairs and tables are butt cheap. Furthermore, you can find much cheaper furniture from yard sales and such. WTF do you think college kids do? Do you think they have $1000 sofas in their dorms? Hell no. So honestly, get a freaking life and a clue. He probably spent at least 3 chairs and a table's worth of money on tape!
Second, if this guy made the furniture so that the FedEx logo shows, and published the pics to a website, FedEx has every right to go after him (by all legal means).
Agreed.
The bands got themselves into the mess. The record labels are sly, and they know their legal stuff, but that's no excuse for stupidity on the part of the signer(s).
If the contract says "You agree to distribute EXCLUSIVELY through Sony," well then guess what that means?
The record labels are in business to distribute. When you sign with them, your agreement to exclusively distribute with them is one of the first things on the page. If the band isn't okay with that, they shouldn't have signed. That's the bottom line.
ZDNet UK, my hat goes off to you. That has to be one of the best examples of rhetoric sarcasm I've seen in a company response in a long time! Nice middle finger up to Google, lol.
And here I thought companies didn't know how to be so slick.
Good idea. Sign contract, but when you don't like contract, breach contract.
I wonder if any of them tried resolving this legally/civily/maturely before blowing up? Would be very nice to know what kind of dialog went on between the band and the label before they jumped off the cliff (if any). Did Sony know the band was concerned about this, or is this whole affair gonna look like some 1960's hippie revolt?