1. If you're unhappy with the movie industry, stealing the movies is not the answer. All this does is make you a criminal, ruins your moral integrity, and hurts the industry.
2. So yer disgruntled about the pay scales in the movie industry? Well, aside from your belief that the guy pushing the camera dolly around should get paid the same as everyone else, that scale is something to be considered. If your "underpaid minion" is only getting X-percent out of the final budget, the less money a movie makes, the less money there is in X. So when you steal that movie, not only are you doing nothing to solve the problem, but you are hurting the "underpaid minon" by decreasing the amount of profit going into his X salary.
3. So you tell yourself "It's just one movie. One stolen DVD is nothing compared to the millions." Now multiply that one DVD by the thousands of others thinking the same way, and do the math.
4. There is no end to the number of people who will complain about having to pay for things. If they can steal it, they will, because they have some screwed-up belief that they have the right not to be charged for a service. Nowhere, anywhere, does it say that the movie industry doesn't have the right to charge the consumer whatever the hell they want. They could charge us $500 to buy a DVD if they wanted to. Wouldn't do their sales very good, but they could. If they sell a movie for $20, that is the price of the movie. You can either buy the entertainment, or don't get it. Your ability or willingness to buy the DVD is irrelevant. A thousand years ago, if you wanted a barrel, the price was two chickens. No chickens, no barrel. That's just the way it was. Nothing's changed. If you want the DVD, you pay 20 bucks. Don't have 20 bucks, you don't get the movie. Bitching and moaning about it is your right. Stealing it is not. If you don't like it, you can use your democratic powers and try to have things changed.
Personally, I work hard for the money I make, with which I like to use to buy movies and CDs once in a while. The fact that some shmuck(s) out there is stealing the stuff for free and doesn't see a problem with that, infuriates me to no end. I have no problem with the US government romping around the known world slaughtering the locations, equipment, and people involved in these mass piracy groups. They should all be castrated and sent to the salt-mines to be used as free labor and forgotten.
Having been to Japan and having seen a good example of the 99% that doesn't make it to the US, I would rather think that it is not the US but the Japanese who are killing the US market for Anime. Honestly, the folks who make some of those flicks must need serious psychological help on a routine basis...*twitches*
Microsoft has unparalleled influence throughout the Federal government.
Aside from the Navy and Marines (who run almost entirely on Microsoft products), the Army, Pentagon, FBI, and CIA (just to name a few) all run with a unix core and a Windows enterprise application suite. (In short, the machine is unix but you work with Windows.)
Of course Microsoft is going to try as hard as they can to get their products into everything they can. This is business. MS has the money, the power, and the consumer grip, to lug themselves into just about anything on command. What company out there is going to NOT try to get their product in before their competitor? This isn't brain surgery, folks. So MS is trying to bash Linux so it can gain a bigger peice of the pie...This honestly shouldn't be shocking or freaking-out anyone.
Most space probe missions have their data too widely spread across both public and government institutions for such an event to be "covered up." Plus the growth of public astronomy technology and abilities grows constantly, so it would only be a matter of time before someone outside of the "control" would find out.
I see a number of posters stating simply that "AMD is complaining becuase stores/companies went with the better chip manufacturer." This...is bullcrap. Intel is not better than AMD, and AMD is not better than Intel. The tides of chip superiority change constantly, often with little differences. This is the same as complaining about NVIDIA being better than ATI, or vise-versa. It's fruitless and moronic conjecture. What is superior today, could very well be inferior tomorrow. This happens all the time.
As for the lawsuit, from what I've read so far, AMD has a point. It's a boat with some leaks, but it's afloat. Let them bash it out. We all know who will win (whoever sticks their hands in the pockets of those in power). This, as usual, is big-money politics in the legal system. The outcome of this will have little to do with the actual facts.
1. It may be a typo, but the Slashdot blurb says it'll take between 6-trillion
and 200-trillion to put up a particle screen, but only 500-billion to link up
a bunch of spacecract.
*Scratches Head*
Why would making linkable satellites be cheaper than a screen of ejected particles?
2. Has any of those scientists stopped to think about what 200-trillion could
do right here on Earth? No spaceships required. 200-trillion could do a heck
of a lot of patch work to our ecosystem that would be good and effective, verses
a 200-trillion dollar waste of a ring that may or may not work and is not a
long-term solution.
3. Eye...sore. Does anyone have an idea how much of a plague this'll be upon
our skies? If you don't think we'll see it, think again. This sucker's gonna
be up there, all the time, being a pest.
4. This reminds me of that tried-and-true scenario where there's a problem,
and instead of addressing the problem itself, people just make a fix that treats
the symptom, but not the problem. And as the problem gets worse, the fix needed
to hide the problem, gets bigger...and bigger...and bigger...until it's either
too big and everything blows up, or the people are destroyed by their own obsession
with the fix............So we put this ring up in space, however that comes
about. What then? Global warming is not just caused by the sun. It's caused
by us, too. Pretty soon there'll be a need for a bigger solution, and so on.
5. Since when do we know enough about our planet, or the sun for that matter,
to be actively effecting conditions on a global scale? Given that this is still
just a dream on the boards, it only helps make it sound more like a bad science-fiction
story.
So if you make a P2P app, yer okay. If you make a P2P app and promote the piracy of software/music/etc, yer not.
...
Sounds good to me. What's the problem?
Companies cannot be entirely responsible for what people do with their products. I mean, Apple sells the iPod for playing music. They aren't responsible if I tie a rope to my iPod and use it as a mace to kill someone. However, they would be responsible if they had advertisements saying I should tie a rope to my iPod and kill people.
If I use a P2P app, there's usually no limit on the kinds of things you can share, and usually no control over the community that uses the P2P app. The company making the P2P app cannot be held responsible for the files people share, especially since a legitament mp3 looks no different from a pirated mp3 on the P2P network.
Crank it down to 10 or 20 years, not life plus 70!
Are you kidding? Hell no. The copyright laws are meant to protect an idea. My idea. If I invent something when I'm 30, you can be damn sure I still want it protected when I'm 50! And beyond! After death, you might have a point, but only under the circumstance of a lengthy lifetime. If I invent something today, and kick the bucket tomorrow, too bad. You don't get to jump on my idea. You also don't get to commit a corporate assassination to get my patents. It's my idea. Get off.
And make it so that everything written on a napkin is not automatically copyrighted.
Are you nuts? Do you have any idea how freaking overloaded and crazy things would get if there was no blanket copyright law? Think about it for a second. Think about all the things that are copyrighted and protected, and now imagine all those things having to be physically represented to the patent office. (BTW, we actually used to do this during the dawning days of the US patent office, but for the exact reason above, it failed quickly and we got the system similar to what we have now.)
When it comes to video games, the publisher, while a necessary
evil at this point in time, takes far too much credit for the product of the
developer, and keeps far too much of the profit.
The less money in the equation, the less there is for the company making the game. If you do a 70/30 split of profits, guess how big that 30% is when the profit goes down?
You are also missing the point that all the so-called 'lost
profits' that keep coming up in discussions about downloading software (remember,
no eyepatches involved!) are all bunk. If they see 1000 people on bittorrent
downloading whatever new game came out, they assume that they are losing 1000
sales (1000 x 50 = $50,000 in lost profits according to their math). When in
actually, probably a good portion of those people wouldn't have bought the game
in the first place, because of various reasons; can't afford it, think it's
a piece of shit, know it's a piece of shit because of testing out the cracked/downloaded
version, etc. They pull these numbers out of their ass, in order to make their
cause seem more just.
Yer response is bunk. Not only have I worked in the gaming industry and seen this first hand, but the logic that "those people wouldn't have bought the game in the first place" is unbalanced and leaky. For one, it doesn't matter if you would have bought the game or not, you played it so you should have bought it. Second, a very small percentage of those downloading the game illegally, didn't want to actually play it, so you end up with a large number of illegal users = lost profit. The fact that some of those users "can't afford it" is NOT justification for them stealing it. I can't afford the latest version of 3DstudioMax...but that doesn't give me the right to go steal it from a p2p. Lastly, regardless of "their" numbers, the hit to the industry is large enough to easily warrant complaint.
Is it unethical to take what you cannot afford? Probably.
Not probably. Is. If you can't pay to ride, you don't ride. You might think is sucks, and you can bitch and whine all you want, but at the end of the day, you can't pay, you don't ride.
Is it theft? Not according to the dictionary definition. Theft
involves taking a physical product away from a person, robbing them of the actual
sale of that actual product. Downloading a copy of God of War is not the same
as walking into EB and slipping a copy of God of War into your book bag.
Eheim. Since you are aparently lost in the lapse of time, I'll inform you of this thing called the "digital age" where not all belongings and products are physical. Therefore, if you steal the product of another, or the belonging of another, you are committing theft. Oh, and Webster's Dictionary isn't a legal document, it's a dictionary. Don't quote from it as if it is the law.
Unfortuately, with the amount of money the publishers have
from raping the developers, they can afford to push laws to just what you want:
$75 a game, locked-in-stone EULAs giving them permission to do anything and
everything to your computer while giving you permission to play the game you
purchased if it's a Slurmday, and the electric chair for evil software 'pirates'.
Yarr.
Actually, the price has gone up already due to piracy. Defense against piracy and paying for the lost revenue cuts into the profits of the publishers, forcing them to jack the prices up higher. EULA are already "cut in stone" as you say, although I have yet to read one that says they have ANY power to do ANYTHING to my computer, so I'll chalk that one up to your paranoia.
And, of course, given that those pirating games not only hurt the livelihood of the folks making the games and the industry, and hurt us, the legal users, why should the pirates not be more harshly punished? Why shouldn't there be a legal stepup against pirates?
Though I wouldn't expect you to understand, since yer comments lead me to believe yer ardently pro-piracy.
Yer not trying very hard, then. There's tons of companies that give preferential treatment to customers based on their type of ownership, and there are tons of companies who consume products developed by others and assume the market for those products as their own.
Software company X sees product Y, buys product Y (or partnerships with company owning Y) and sells it as their own product as a component of company X's product. Happens all the time. The fact that Microsoft is one of the largest doing this, doesn't change the fact. It just makes them more visible. And as the owners of the environment these products are in, Microsoft is in a prime position to demand and reject what they will. You would do no different in their position.br>
As for the whole "geniune" argument, come on. If you buy a used car, you get different treatment than if you bought a dealership's new models. If you legally bought your MS product, you have a genuine MS product, and have no reason to be complaining. If you have an illegal copy, fuck off and die.
If MS wants to weed out its legal users from its illegal users, what's the problem? If yer a legal user, you have nothing to worry about and should shut up about this. If yer an illegal user, what did you expect? You stole the software and now MS is trying to nail you for it. Too bad. Stop crying and just remove yourself from the gene pool quietly.
If stores (supermarkets, 7-11's, etc) began selling lock-pick sets off the shelf, and break-ins became common, would that mean we should give up locking our doors? That we should give up trying to protect ourselves?
Where do these people think the money to develope those games and programs comes from? Gaming companies, especially, depend on the income from the sale of their product. The more it gets stollen, the less money they have to recover from the losses of development, and the less they have for their next project. I can't tell you how many gaming companies have dropped like flies because of people stealing their products. Remember Impressions? The makers of such fine games as the Pharaoh and Caesar city builder series? Killed due to piracy. The HL2 project had to be cut short of true completion, and the release was delayed for months, due to piracy.
Programmers and developers expect to get paid for slaving away to build software products. Companies depend on income to survive, not to mention that they are in the business to make money in the first place! So to protect their income, they have to start creating more and more stringent licenses and locks...which translates into more hassel for us.
We need to start policing P2P networks, start enforcing the existing laws, upgrade those existing laws to just "kill the fucker", and take this problem head-on.
Oh gee, Microsoft decided to only develope for their environment. Harsh. We should all cry now and ask Bill why Microsoft decided to focus on their own product.
People complain about anything these days. If Microsoft doesn't want to develope AV/AS programs for Unix/Linux, who cares? It's their own damn perogative, and they've got their own damn environment. I say, let them play with their own toys until they get those right, before they start didlemacking around in other realms.
I'm all for advancing security technology. However, if these hackers are, as people have been touting, only helping us improve our methods, they should be on the team and not against it.
Following that logic, we should recall all our nuclear submarines and make their missiles land-based, so they can be continually checked to make sure they function when needed.
Look, these people did their job the best they could. The thing was checked thoroughly before they packed it up. Subs are great ways to deploy small rockets, as they can be positioned in the most effective places on the globe for the best launch results, vs a land based platform that is stuck in one spot and limited to land.
This isn't the first time a submarine was used to launch a satellite into orbit, and not just the Russians, either. We've done it too.
The truth of the matter is that shyt happens, and it happened. We can only wait to see how things turn out.
Everyone's putting this into a context of some sort, so here's mine:
We have cops because there are criminals. But according to the reactions I've seen so far, the cops should be happy we have murderers and theives because they wouldn't have a job otherwise.
What kind of sick, screwed up logic is that!? And why in the heck are people trying to twist the reaction towards this end?
There are hackers, so we created defenses...which in the mirror means we have defenses 'cause there are hackers. We should be thankful there are hackers so we have defenses? Fuck that. And fuck anyone who thinks that.
I have a lock on my front door because there are theives, but I don't go home each night, lock the door, get down on my knees and say "praise the lord there are theives so I can have this lovely door lock!"
It is only prudent that, given that I have something to lose, I should endevour to protect it. Theives (and the like) are not only the reason but the RESULT of having these locks.
So there are these people out there, called hackers, who get some kind of sick joy out of harming, destroying, discrediting and ruining people and their lives. They are the reason for the protections we have, but there is no reason we should be happy we have them. This guy in this article is right, the hackers are a problem and a menace. I say fuck them.
I will not give any glory to hackers. You don't complement the enemy.
The troops are there to protect us from the enemy. I will not thank the enemy for giving me a reason to have troops. I would rather not have to have them. And though we don't live in a WallGreens world, I can't believe anyone would rather have to spend massive amounts of time and money, than not. Fuck the hackers. Fuck their supporters. And fuck anyone who thinks the hackers are just innocent dorks having "fun."
It is our duty to interrogate the past and consider the morality of their actions.
Yes, it is good to not forget the past and learn from it, but I think the root of the problem he was talking about is that you must view the past in the SAME context that it was lived in. One must understand things from the frame of mind that those things were done in. If you can do that, and still find fault, then you have a voice to speak with. If you do not, and you find faults, it is because you are not truly seeing the situation as it was.
It's true that none of us "youngsters" can know what it is like to attack a country with nukes at the end of a long and bloody war.
However, that aside, one must be aware that there is a very large difference between the nuke-sentiment during the days of WWII, and of today.
People today, are frankly idiotically fearful of nukes and all things containing the word "nuclear". It has been the bane of our civilization. MRI scanners used in hospitals are actually called "Nuclear-Magnetic-Resonance-Imaging" machines, but because people are so paranoid of all things with "nuclear" in the title, the name had to be changed to just "MRI" because no one would get in it. Stupid.
Anyway, no one can view the events at the end of WWII-Pacific in the same light as today. To do so would be completely out of context with the feelings and social situations of the 1940's.
Slashdot Mirror
1. If you're unhappy with the movie industry, stealing the movies is not the answer. All this does is make you a criminal, ruins your moral integrity, and hurts the industry.
2. So yer disgruntled about the pay scales in the movie industry? Well, aside from your belief that the guy pushing the camera dolly around should get paid the same as everyone else, that scale is something to be considered. If your "underpaid minion" is only getting X-percent out of the final budget, the less money a movie makes, the less money there is in X. So when you steal that movie, not only are you doing nothing to solve the problem, but you are hurting the "underpaid minon" by decreasing the amount of profit going into his X salary.
3. So you tell yourself "It's just one movie. One stolen DVD is nothing compared to the millions." Now multiply that one DVD by the thousands of others thinking the same way, and do the math.
4. There is no end to the number of people who will complain about having to pay for things. If they can steal it, they will, because they have some screwed-up belief that they have the right not to be charged for a service. Nowhere, anywhere, does it say that the movie industry doesn't have the right to charge the consumer whatever the hell they want. They could charge us $500 to buy a DVD if they wanted to. Wouldn't do their sales very good, but they could. If they sell a movie for $20, that is the price of the movie. You can either buy the entertainment, or don't get it. Your ability or willingness to buy the DVD is irrelevant. A thousand years ago, if you wanted a barrel, the price was two chickens. No chickens, no barrel. That's just the way it was. Nothing's changed. If you want the DVD, you pay 20 bucks. Don't have 20 bucks, you don't get the movie. Bitching and moaning about it is your right. Stealing it is not. If you don't like it, you can use your democratic powers and try to have things changed.
Woops, didn't know the moderator was pro-piracy. Sorry I bitched about yer loved-ones dude.
Don't connect to the internet without protection! DUH!
Personally, I work hard for the money I make, with which I like to use to buy movies and CDs once in a while. The fact that some shmuck(s) out there is stealing the stuff for free and doesn't see a problem with that, infuriates me to no end. I have no problem with the US government romping around the known world slaughtering the locations, equipment, and people involved in these mass piracy groups. They should all be castrated and sent to the salt-mines to be used as free labor and forgotten.
Having been to Japan and having seen a good example of the 99% that doesn't make it to the US, I would rather think that it is not the US but the Japanese who are killing the US market for Anime. Honestly, the folks who make some of those flicks must need serious psychological help on a routine basis...*twitches*
Microsoft has unparalleled influence throughout the Federal government.
Aside from the Navy and Marines (who run almost entirely on Microsoft products), the Army, Pentagon, FBI, and CIA (just to name a few) all run with a unix core and a Windows enterprise application suite. (In short, the machine is unix but you work with Windows.)
Of course Microsoft is going to try as hard as they can to get their products into everything they can. This is business. MS has the money, the power, and the consumer grip, to lug themselves into just about anything on command. What company out there is going to NOT try to get their product in before their competitor? This isn't brain surgery, folks. So MS is trying to bash Linux so it can gain a bigger peice of the pie...This honestly shouldn't be shocking or freaking-out anyone.
Most space probe missions have their data too widely spread across both public and government institutions for such an event to be "covered up." Plus the growth of public astronomy technology and abilities grows constantly, so it would only be a matter of time before someone outside of the "control" would find out.
I see a number of posters stating simply that "AMD is complaining becuase stores/companies went with the better chip manufacturer." This...is bullcrap. Intel is not better than AMD, and AMD is not better than Intel. The tides of chip superiority change constantly, often with little differences. This is the same as complaining about NVIDIA being better than ATI, or vise-versa. It's fruitless and moronic conjecture. What is superior today, could very well be inferior tomorrow. This happens all the time.
As for the lawsuit, from what I've read so far, AMD has a point. It's a boat with some leaks, but it's afloat. Let them bash it out. We all know who will win (whoever sticks their hands in the pockets of those in power). This, as usual, is big-money politics in the legal system. The outcome of this will have little to do with the actual facts.
Aw, I point out that this is unfair biased propaganda, and get downmodded. Heh. Nice. If there's a bias, and someone catches on, quell it.
1. It may be a typo, but the Slashdot blurb says it'll take between 6-trillion and 200-trillion to put up a particle screen, but only 500-billion to link up a bunch of spacecract.
*Scratches Head*
Why would making linkable satellites be cheaper than a screen of ejected particles?
2. Has any of those scientists stopped to think about what 200-trillion could do right here on Earth? No spaceships required. 200-trillion could do a heck of a lot of patch work to our ecosystem that would be good and effective, verses a 200-trillion dollar waste of a ring that may or may not work and is not a long-term solution.
3. Eye...sore. Does anyone have an idea how much of a plague this'll be upon our skies? If you don't think we'll see it, think again. This sucker's gonna be up there, all the time, being a pest.
4. This reminds me of that tried-and-true scenario where there's a problem, and instead of addressing the problem itself, people just make a fix that treats the symptom, but not the problem. And as the problem gets worse, the fix needed to hide the problem, gets bigger...and bigger...and bigger...until it's either too big and everything blows up, or the people are destroyed by their own obsession with the fix............So we put this ring up in space, however that comes about. What then? Global warming is not just caused by the sun. It's caused by us, too. Pretty soon there'll be a need for a bigger solution, and so on.
5. Since when do we know enough about our planet, or the sun for that matter, to be actively effecting conditions on a global scale? Given that this is still just a dream on the boards, it only helps make it sound more like a bad science-fiction story.
So if you make a P2P app, yer okay. If you make a P2P app and promote the piracy of software/music/etc, yer not.
...
Sounds good to me. What's the problem?
Companies cannot be entirely responsible for what people do with their products. I mean, Apple sells the iPod for playing music. They aren't responsible if I tie a rope to my iPod and use it as a mace to kill someone. However, they would be responsible if they had advertisements saying I should tie a rope to my iPod and kill people.
If I use a P2P app, there's usually no limit on the kinds of things you can share, and usually no control over the community that uses the P2P app. The company making the P2P app cannot be held responsible for the files people share, especially since a legitament mp3 looks no different from a pirated mp3 on the P2P network.
Are you kidding? Hell no. The copyright laws are meant to protect an idea. My idea. If I invent something when I'm 30, you can be damn sure I still want it protected when I'm 50! And beyond! After death, you might have a point, but only under the circumstance of a lengthy lifetime. If I invent something today, and kick the bucket tomorrow, too bad. You don't get to jump on my idea. You also don't get to commit a corporate assassination to get my patents. It's my idea. Get off.
Are you nuts? Do you have any idea how freaking overloaded and crazy things would get if there was no blanket copyright law? Think about it for a second. Think about all the things that are copyrighted and protected, and now imagine all those things having to be physically represented to the patent office. (BTW, we actually used to do this during the dawning days of the US patent office, but for the exact reason above, it failed quickly and we got the system similar to what we have now.)
The less money in the equation, the less there is for the company making the game. If you do a 70/30 split of profits, guess how big that 30% is when the profit goes down?
Yer response is bunk. Not only have I worked in the gaming industry and seen this first hand, but the logic that "those people wouldn't have bought the game in the first place" is unbalanced and leaky. For one, it doesn't matter if you would have bought the game or not, you played it so you should have bought it. Second, a very small percentage of those downloading the game illegally, didn't want to actually play it, so you end up with a large number of illegal users = lost profit. The fact that some of those users "can't afford it" is NOT justification for them stealing it. I can't afford the latest version of 3DstudioMax...but that doesn't give me the right to go steal it from a p2p. Lastly, regardless of "their" numbers, the hit to the industry is large enough to easily warrant complaint.
Not probably. Is. If you can't pay to ride, you don't ride. You might think is sucks, and you can bitch and whine all you want, but at the end of the day, you can't pay, you don't ride.
Eheim. Since you are aparently lost in the lapse of time, I'll inform you of this thing called the "digital age" where not all belongings and products are physical. Therefore, if you steal the product of another, or the belonging of another, you are committing theft. Oh, and Webster's Dictionary isn't a legal document, it's a dictionary. Don't quote from it as if it is the law.
Actually, the price has gone up already due to piracy. Defense against piracy and paying for the lost revenue cuts into the profits of the publishers, forcing them to jack the prices up higher. EULA are already "cut in stone" as you say, although I have yet to read one that says they have ANY power to do ANYTHING to my computer, so I'll chalk that one up to your paranoia.
And, of course, given that those pirating games not only hurt the livelihood of the folks making the games and the industry, and hurt us, the legal users, why should the pirates not be more harshly punished? Why shouldn't there be a legal stepup against pirates?
Though I wouldn't expect you to understand, since yer comments lead me to believe yer ardently pro-piracy.
I thought maintaining battery life was a coding/engineering issue? What's it being Linux got to do with it?
Yer not trying very hard, then. There's tons of companies that give preferential treatment to customers based on their type of ownership, and there are tons of companies who consume products developed by others and assume the market for those products as their own.
Software company X sees product Y, buys product Y (or partnerships with company owning Y) and sells it as their own product as a component of company X's product. Happens all the time. The fact that Microsoft is one of the largest doing this, doesn't change the fact. It just makes them more visible. And as the owners of the environment these products are in, Microsoft is in a prime position to demand and reject what they will. You would do no different in their position.br>
As for the whole "geniune" argument, come on. If you buy a used car, you get different treatment than if you bought a dealership's new models. If you legally bought your MS product, you have a genuine MS product, and have no reason to be complaining. If you have an illegal copy, fuck off and die.
If MS wants to weed out its legal users from its illegal users, what's the problem? If yer a legal user, you have nothing to worry about and should shut up about this. If yer an illegal user, what did you expect? You stole the software and now MS is trying to nail you for it. Too bad. Stop crying and just remove yourself from the gene pool quietly.
If stores (supermarkets, 7-11's, etc) began selling lock-pick sets off the shelf, and break-ins became common, would that mean we should give up locking our doors? That we should give up trying to protect ourselves?
Where do these people think the money to develope those games and programs comes from? Gaming companies, especially, depend on the income from the sale of their product. The more it gets stollen, the less money they have to recover from the losses of development, and the less they have for their next project. I can't tell you how many gaming companies have dropped like flies because of people stealing their products. Remember Impressions? The makers of such fine games as the Pharaoh and Caesar city builder series? Killed due to piracy. The HL2 project had to be cut short of true completion, and the release was delayed for months, due to piracy.
Programmers and developers expect to get paid for slaving away to build software products. Companies depend on income to survive, not to mention that they are in the business to make money in the first place! So to protect their income, they have to start creating more and more stringent licenses and locks...which translates into more hassel for us.
We need to start policing P2P networks, start enforcing the existing laws, upgrade those existing laws to just "kill the fucker", and take this problem head-on.
Oh gee, Microsoft decided to only develope for their environment. Harsh. We should all cry now and ask Bill why Microsoft decided to focus on their own product.
People complain about anything these days. If Microsoft doesn't want to develope AV/AS programs for Unix/Linux, who cares? It's their own damn perogative, and they've got their own damn environment. I say, let them play with their own toys until they get those right, before they start didlemacking around in other realms.
You act like Microsoft's the only company that does this.
Indeed.
I'm all for advancing security technology. However, if these hackers are, as people have been touting, only helping us improve our methods, they should be on the team and not against it.
Following that logic, we should recall all our nuclear submarines and make their missiles land-based, so they can be continually checked to make sure they function when needed.
Look, these people did their job the best they could. The thing was checked thoroughly before they packed it up. Subs are great ways to deploy small rockets, as they can be positioned in the most effective places on the globe for the best launch results, vs a land based platform that is stuck in one spot and limited to land.
This isn't the first time a submarine was used to launch a satellite into orbit, and not just the Russians, either. We've done it too.
The truth of the matter is that shyt happens, and it happened. We can only wait to see how things turn out.
Everyone's putting this into a context of some sort, so here's mine:
We have cops because there are criminals. But according to the reactions I've seen so far, the cops should be happy we have murderers and theives because they wouldn't have a job otherwise.
What kind of sick, screwed up logic is that!? And why in the heck are people trying to twist the reaction towards this end?
There are hackers, so we created defenses...which in the mirror means we have defenses 'cause there are hackers. We should be thankful there are hackers so we have defenses? Fuck that. And fuck anyone who thinks that.
I have a lock on my front door because there are theives, but I don't go home each night, lock the door, get down on my knees and say "praise the lord there are theives so I can have this lovely door lock!"
It is only prudent that, given that I have something to lose, I should endevour to protect it. Theives (and the like) are not only the reason but the RESULT of having these locks.
So there are these people out there, called hackers, who get some kind of sick joy out of harming, destroying, discrediting and ruining people and their lives. They are the reason for the protections we have, but there is no reason we should be happy we have them. This guy in this article is right, the hackers are a problem and a menace. I say fuck them.
I will not give any glory to hackers. You don't complement the enemy.
The troops are there to protect us from the enemy. I will not thank the enemy for giving me a reason to have troops. I would rather not have to have them. And though we don't live in a WallGreens world, I can't believe anyone would rather have to spend massive amounts of time and money, than not. Fuck the hackers. Fuck their supporters. And fuck anyone who thinks the hackers are just innocent dorks having "fun."
It is our duty to interrogate the past and consider the morality of their actions.
Yes, it is good to not forget the past and learn from it, but I think the root of the problem he was talking about is that you must view the past in the SAME context that it was lived in. One must understand things from the frame of mind that those things were done in. If you can do that, and still find fault, then you have a voice to speak with. If you do not, and you find faults, it is because you are not truly seeing the situation as it was.
It's true that none of us "youngsters" can know what it is like to attack a country with nukes at the end of a long and bloody war.
However, that aside, one must be aware that there is a very large difference between the nuke-sentiment during the days of WWII, and of today.
People today, are frankly idiotically fearful of nukes and all things containing the word "nuclear". It has been the bane of our civilization. MRI scanners used in hospitals are actually called "Nuclear-Magnetic-Resonance-Imaging" machines, but because people are so paranoid of all things with "nuclear" in the title, the name had to be changed to just "MRI" because no one would get in it. Stupid.
Anyway, no one can view the events at the end of WWII-Pacific in the same light as today. To do so would be completely out of context with the feelings and social situations of the 1940's.
The bomb dropped on Nagasaki didn't even land on target, so I'm not sure early-warning (however you want to view that idea) would have done much good.
I wonder how much of this story and commentary has been twisted to support the current anti-nuke fad of today?