The problem with this statement is that it's somewhat akin to saying, "If people never did anything wrong, we wouldn't need laws". While it's perfectly true, it's also quite useless, as you cannot realistically expect every single person to be righteous enough.
Well put and I agree, which is why I have no problem with the concept of Law or the concept of DRM.
DRM, like Law can be implemented in a number of ways - some are good for the majority of people, some are not.
Some laws should be abolished and some DRM methods should too - that doesn't mean that Law or DRM itself is evil, it just means we need to weed out the stupid laws within the system of Law which I see as the same as weeding out those stupid DRM methods (subscription based music for example) from the concept of DRM.
The difficulty with this though is that while Law is easier to change as it's (apparently, in a democracy) controlled by the people (public), DRM is controlled directly by a company (private).... but regardless, the customer will always win - eventually. If a form of DRM makes things inconvenient for the average user or target market, that form will eventually die along with the companies that continue to support it.
How will they stop people just ripping off some of the templates from MS Office, obfuscating them slightly, and then submitting them?
As they'll be judging on orginality, I doubt anything remotly "MS Office" would be selected. Office templates stand out like a sore thumb.... a bit like a MS Powerpoint Presentation:)
There's an MS office template for most things, so the submissions will most likely either be:
a) a copy of something MS already has, or
b) obscure enough to be only of use to a very small group of people....
There are MS templates for most things but that does not mean that the "MS way" is the only way it can (or should) be done.
Not as silly as if the $300 donated to cancer research was caused by the $300 worth of coal that you burnt in order to pay for the $300 donated to cancer research to prevent cancer caused by the $300 worth of coal that you burnt in order to pay for the $300 donated to cancer research caused by the $300 worth of coal that you burnt in order to pay for the $300 donated to cancer research caused by the $300 worth of coal that you burnt in order to pay for the $300 donated to cancer research caused by the $300 worth of coal that you burnt in order to pay for the $300 donated to cancer research.
I HATE SILLY LOOPS
:)
Motivations that command respect
on
Samus vs. The Galaxy
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Unlike other game heroines, she hasn't spread herself and her secrets everywhere like a high school senior of ill repute. Samus' motivations still command respect and a certain degree of awe."
Yes, the fact that she appears to be motivated to take off more clothes the faster you finish the game certainly commands a great deal of respect.
So, when google index my copyrighted site and show it to you as the buffered page, you think my "artistic vision" is applied?
Webmasters can stop google from indexing their site. Even if it does get indexed, google makes it clear that the page you see is part of googles cache and even provides links to the original source.
Or, when I watch TV and get cut to commersials in an exciting moment it the movie, you think the directors "artistic vision" is applied?
That sucks when that happens but that's how you pay for watching movies on free to air television. I never said that life was perfect now for film makers, I stated that they now have one less hurdle to overcome.
Or, when you go to a gallery and see a picture in a frame. Do you think they artist has approved to this frame, this "artistic vision"?
Hang on - what the hell is your argument? Your opinion here is congruent with my original post! I WANT the artist to have control - sounds like you do too - great!
I think you will find very many cases where an artist defines his/her work, and where other change that. Sadly most people doesn't understand it, and only points to books and films for this. If we had undestood it, we would probably also put it in the category of "to difficult to implement", since almost everything would be illegal to change.
I never said that this decision now made everything perfect - I agree, there still are a lot of problems for artists, but this decision is one less hurdle a film maker has to overcome and isn't that a good thing??? Anyway, aren't we both saying the same thing here?? What is it from my post that you seem to be arguing against?
Don't approve of this action just because you think it only hurts a bunch of "right-wing Christian zealots". Remember fair use! There was a one-to-one copy sold with each of these DVDs---the original and the edited. The filmmakers did not lose one dime, and in fact made money with each copy sold.
I don't approve purely because it upsets a bunch of "right wing Christian zealots" - that's just a nice side effect!:)
I do approve of the decision though as it means that it's one less hurdle directors have to avoid to get the film they intended out to the masses.
The filmmakers may have not lost any money but those who view the edited movie are not being presented with the intended cut. Movies should not be sanatized by a 3rd party, distributor or studio.
As strange as it may seem to you, most directors don't make films just for the $$$.
So if we are to argue that, if you bought something you have the legal right to do whatever you want to it (Fast Forward through commercials, play on a Linux box, rip to a hard drive), then you cannot allow Hollywood to start acquiring new rights for their so-called "artistic vision". Otherwise, you will find yourself unable to fast forward through scenes (or commercials) because that would violate the "artistic vision" of Hollywood.
I can see what your point is but your argument is suggesting that that the average slashdot reader agrees with "the legal right to do whatever" AND that "artistic vision" is a valid excuse studios and distributors can use. I think most will agree with the former but very few with the latter.
If the director wants to apply his or her "artistic vision" to the DVD release then that's fine with me - I may not like it but at least it's how they intended it. One example of this is David Lynch not releasing his DVD's with chapter points - it pisses me off but if he wants it that way, then fine.
Remember folks---it is all about control. Hollywood wants all the control. We cannot surrender even the smallest bit of it, because as soon as we do it establishes legal precedence.
Hollywood is too broad a term to use here - the STUDIO HEADS want control because they believe control (through DRM or whatever) will get them more $$$. The FILMMAKERS want control for reasons of artistic vision and when it comes to true artistic vision and getting their film out the door the way they want it to be seen then more power to them!
This makes the assumption that the masses want "fast and efficient." I think quite the opposite. If the masses wanted fast and efficient, they would turn off the fancy stuff in XP and turn it back to looking like 2000. Sorry, but the masses are not interested in speed or efficiency, they are looking for eye candy, which is exactly why MS will not lose any significant market share.
The masses are not interested in either as Mac's with OS X have plenty of "fast and efficient" and eye candy, yet they seem to be lacking in market share.
The masses want a combination of low price and "what they know" which usually means "what they use at work".
Gartner puts Apple's 1996 share at 4.6 percent, IDC at 5.1 percent. Market share in 2005 was 2.2 percent from Gartner and 2.3 percent from IDC. According to Gartner, Apple's market share peaked at 15.8 percent in 1980 -- four years before the Mac was introduced.
Apple is somewhat stronger in U.S. consumer market share, with Gartner giving Apple 5.8 percent in 2005 and IDC at 2.9 percent.
It's also worth noting that Apple's worldwide market share did move up slightly last year from 1.9 percent in 2004, according to Gartner, or 2.0 percent, according to IDC.
That's because Mac sales are exceeding industry growth rates. Apple shipped 38 percent more Macs in the fiscal year ended Sept. 24, 2005, than in the prior year, and shipments were up 20 percent in the last three months of 2005.
I generally don't trust statistics but I have more faith in these numbers than someone who calls himself MSFanBoi2.
Nobody ought to make jokes until AFTER the shuttle launch, since we don't yet know the morbid details soon to play out that will make the jokes funny or not.
I don't think anyone here is laughing and making fun of at the horrors of a potential disaster - that's not funny.
What is funny is the irony of the situation: On July the 4th, people all over the USA gather and celebrate while watching rockets explode in the sky - AND THEY CHOOSE JULY 4TH TO LAUNCH THE SHUTTLE??
Now that's Irony.
Interesting stuff!
I'm surprised they have to tell people to use strong passwords? They don't enforce this when a user changes their password?? There's a bit on P2P too - they don't block this?? I know P2P networks can be a bitch to control through the firewall but there are application layer firewalls and other intelligent devices to sort this kind of thing out.
Interesting that classified PC's must also have removable HDD's and be clearly marked classified - shouldn't they just be physically located where they can't be used by those without clearance? Marking something with a big orange "secret" sticker and putting it out in the open doesn't seem smart to me. Maybe the infrastructure's so large and disparate it's difficult to control these kinds of things.
As a side note, whoever put this together seriously needs to expand their clip-art archive.... or delete it altogether would probably be best.
In short: authorities were concerned about Microsoft dominance in the web-browser market. And they have been worried about Mcirosoft dominance in the media-playback market. Yet they are not concerned about DirectX and the dominance it gives to Microsoft? How come?
Because nobody's being forced or tricked into using DX to play games - the people who made the game made the choice and that choice is entirely up to them.
If MS locked down Windows so that only DX API's could be used (no OpenGL, etc) then there'd be cause for argument.
This reminds me, I am certain to be cruicified for not remembering this bit of trivia, but the PS3 is looking more and more like that car that Homer designed for his brother....
Bubble domes and a horn that plays La Cucaracha... eh?
There's still time! Thanks for the idea kid!
-Director of Marketing
-Sony Computer Entertainment
That picture could be genuine but could also have been an unprotected powerpoint slide show that anyone could have edited - that's the way I would have forged it if I was so inclined and had the chance.
By the way, I'm not discounting that it could be real - it's got me curious enough to look on the web for the last 10 mins for some documentation to back up the claims in the story.. I couldn't find anything though.
Anyone got any real documentation or anything to back up the claim?
That wouldn't stop them accessing the site from from somewhere else like a public terminal or home. To add to that - if a banned person couldn't access from their workplace but could from home, they'd probably become even more curious to find out what's being blocked.
So I don't think this guy is fearmongering. He is doing his job just as a firemen who tells you your house is going to burn down.
After reading your comment I found that I totally agree with you. He's not fearmongering but the article sure is!
I didn't see a single quote in that article with reference to terrorism. The quotes from those interviewed refered to criminal activities, but the terms "terrorism" and "cyber-terrorism" were thrown in by the jornalist. Why? Does it matter if they're "terrorists" or not? I couldn't care less - the potential consequences are what matters.
The only reason why the reporter uses the word "Terrorist" is because it gets far more attention than the pre 9/11 "Hacker".
Yep, I think the confusion comes from the fact that they were co-founders of the company Apple (with Ronald Wayne), I think it would be a long stretch to say they were co-inventors of the computer itself.
The average office worker is not as computer literate as a software developer because generally, all they can do, is use their word processor, email and spreadsheets. While a software developer would be able use an IDE,compilers, debuggers and also be able to use a word processor to write a report and figure out their budgets on a spreadsheet.
Agreed, but I was coming from the point of view that the term "computer literate" is used so broadly that it requires a context to make any sense of what it actually refers to. There is no one single objective definition of computer literacy that everyone will agree on.
For example:
Computer literate to me means that one has knowledge of computer system architecture at the hardware level (where the actual "computer" computes) and that they can easily adapt their knowledge from one system to another.
But that's not the same as when a job vacancy is posted for a Receptionist to be "computer literate" yet because of the context of the job description, we all know that it really means that they're after a person who can use MS Office (or equivilant).
You can't measure computer literacy without a context because "computer" is such a vague term these days and "computers" are used by many people for many different things.
FOr the average office worker it's knowing how to use MS Office. For the Hardware Engineer it means something completely different and for the software developer it's different again.
You can only be "truly computer literate" in the context of a particular field.
It's like asking for a "skilled driver" - skilled to what level? Skilled enough to navigate through suburban traffic or to compete in a Gran Prix?
I was thinking the same thing... to add to this - How would one be able to predict that vocal cords are even intact from looking at a skeletal structure??
Microsoft announces another edition of Windows Vista; Windows Vista Forever.
In celebration of it's release, ID Software and Microsoft are teaming up to release Duke Nukem Forever on the same day!
Funny that DNF has taken so long, people have forgotten who the developer is!
I wonder if in five years, we'll forget who owned the Vista project and start blaming Linus!
Slashdot Mirror
The problem with this statement is that it's somewhat akin to saying, "If people never did anything wrong, we wouldn't need laws". While it's perfectly true, it's also quite useless, as you cannot realistically expect every single person to be righteous enough.
Well put and I agree, which is why I have no problem with the concept of Law or the concept of DRM.
DRM, like Law can be implemented in a number of ways - some are good for the majority of people, some are not.
Some laws should be abolished and some DRM methods should too - that doesn't mean that Law or DRM itself is evil, it just means we need to weed out the stupid laws within the system of Law which I see as the same as weeding out those stupid DRM methods (subscription based music for example) from the concept of DRM.
The difficulty with this though is that while Law is easier to change as it's (apparently, in a democracy) controlled by the people (public), DRM is controlled directly by a company (private).... but regardless, the customer will always win - eventually. If a form of DRM makes things inconvenient for the average user or target market, that form will eventually die along with the companies that continue to support it.
There are MS templates for most things but that does not mean that the "MS way" is the only way it can (or should) be done.
That's a lot of resources thrown at very few students.
You've got it the wrong way round.
In Microsoft School, students throw resources!
I assure you that insure can be used interchangeably with ensure. Of that, I'm pretty sure.
Not as silly as if the $300 donated to cancer research was caused by the $300 worth of coal that you burnt in order to pay for the $300 donated to cancer research to prevent cancer caused by the $300 worth of coal that you burnt in order to pay for the $300 donated to cancer research caused by the $300 worth of coal that you burnt in order to pay for the $300 donated to cancer research caused by the $300 worth of coal that you burnt in order to pay for the $300 donated to cancer research caused by the $300 worth of coal that you burnt in order to pay for the $300 donated to cancer research.
:)
I HATE SILLY LOOPS
Yes, the fact that she appears to be motivated to take off more clothes the faster you finish the game certainly commands a great deal of respect.
That sucks when that happens but that's how you pay for watching movies on free to air television. I never said that life was perfect now for film makers, I stated that they now have one less hurdle to overcome.
Hang on - what the hell is your argument? Your opinion here is congruent with my original post! I WANT the artist to have control - sounds like you do too - great!
I never said that this decision now made everything perfect - I agree, there still are a lot of problems for artists, but this decision is one less hurdle a film maker has to overcome and isn't that a good thing??? Anyway, aren't we both saying the same thing here?? What is it from my post that you seem to be arguing against?
I do approve of the decision though as it means that it's one less hurdle directors have to avoid to get the film they intended out to the masses.
The filmmakers may have not lost any money but those who view the edited movie are not being presented with the intended cut. Movies should not be sanatized by a 3rd party, distributor or studio.
As strange as it may seem to you, most directors don't make films just for the $$$.
I can see what your point is but your argument is suggesting that that the average slashdot reader agrees with "the legal right to do whatever" AND that "artistic vision" is a valid excuse studios and distributors can use. I think most will agree with the former but very few with the latter.
If the director wants to apply his or her "artistic vision" to the DVD release then that's fine with me - I may not like it but at least it's how they intended it. One example of this is David Lynch not releasing his DVD's with chapter points - it pisses me off but if he wants it that way, then fine.
Hollywood is too broad a term to use here - the STUDIO HEADS want control because they believe control (through DRM or whatever) will get them more $$$. The FILMMAKERS want control for reasons of artistic vision and when it comes to true artistic vision and getting their film out the door the way they want it to be seen then more power to them!
The masses are not interested in either as Mac's with OS X have plenty of "fast and efficient" and eye candy, yet they seem to be lacking in market share.
The masses want a combination of low price and "what they know" which usually means "what they use at work".
Really? Not according to this article: http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/busine
Apple may have lost market share in the late 90's / early 2000's but they are recovering. I believe this a lot of this is due to OS X.
I generally don't trust statistics but I have more faith in these numbers than someone who calls himself MSFanBoi2.
I don't think anyone here is laughing and making fun of at the horrors of a potential disaster - that's not funny.
What is funny is the irony of the situation: On July the 4th, people all over the USA gather and celebrate while watching rockets explode in the sky - AND THEY CHOOSE JULY 4TH TO LAUNCH THE SHUTTLE??
Now that's Irony.
Interesting stuff!
I'm surprised they have to tell people to use strong passwords? They don't enforce this when a user changes their password?? There's a bit on P2P too - they don't block this?? I know P2P networks can be a bitch to control through the firewall but there are application layer firewalls and other intelligent devices to sort this kind of thing out.
Interesting that classified PC's must also have removable HDD's and be clearly marked classified - shouldn't they just be physically located where they can't be used by those without clearance? Marking something with a big orange "secret" sticker and putting it out in the open doesn't seem smart to me. Maybe the infrastructure's so large and disparate it's difficult to control these kinds of things.
As a side note, whoever put this together seriously needs to expand their clip-art archive.... or delete it altogether would probably be best.
Because nobody's being forced or tricked into using DX to play games - the people who made the game made the choice and that choice is entirely up to them.
If MS locked down Windows so that only DX API's could be used (no OpenGL, etc) then there'd be cause for argument.
Or an insightful comment on slashdot.
This reminds me, I am certain to be cruicified for not remembering this bit of trivia, but the PS3 is looking more and more like that car that Homer designed for his brother....
Bubble domes and a horn that plays La Cucaracha... eh?
There's still time! Thanks for the idea kid!
-Director of Marketing
-Sony Computer Entertainment
That picture could be genuine but could also have been an unprotected powerpoint slide show that anyone could have edited - that's the way I would have forged it if I was so inclined and had the chance.
By the way, I'm not discounting that it could be real - it's got me curious enough to look on the web for the last 10 mins for some documentation to back up the claims in the story.. I couldn't find anything though.
Anyone got any real documentation or anything to back up the claim?
That wouldn't stop them accessing the site from from somewhere else like a public terminal or home. To add to that - if a banned person couldn't access from their workplace but could from home, they'd probably become even more curious to find out what's being blocked.
So I don't think this guy is fearmongering. He is doing his job just as a firemen who tells you your house is going to burn down.
After reading your comment I found that I totally agree with you. He's not fearmongering but the article sure is!
I didn't see a single quote in that article with reference to terrorism. The quotes from those interviewed refered to criminal activities, but the terms "terrorism" and "cyber-terrorism" were thrown in by the jornalist. Why? Does it matter if they're "terrorists" or not? I couldn't care less - the potential consequences are what matters.
The only reason why the reporter uses the word "Terrorist" is because it gets far more attention than the pre 9/11 "Hacker".
This virtualized Linux moves in mysterious ways, but I still haven't found what I'm looking for.
Yep, I think the confusion comes from the fact that they were co-founders of the company Apple (with Ronald Wayne), I think it would be a long stretch to say they were co-inventors of the computer itself.
The average office worker is not as computer literate as a software developer because generally, all they can do, is use their word processor, email and spreadsheets. While a software developer would be able use an IDE,compilers, debuggers and also be able to use a word processor to write a report and figure out their budgets on a spreadsheet.
Agreed, but I was coming from the point of view that the term "computer literate" is used so broadly that it requires a context to make any sense of what it actually refers to. There is no one single objective definition of computer literacy that everyone will agree on.
For example:
Computer literate to me means that one has knowledge of computer system architecture at the hardware level (where the actual "computer" computes) and that they can easily adapt their knowledge from one system to another.
But that's not the same as when a job vacancy is posted for a Receptionist to be "computer literate" yet because of the context of the job description, we all know that it really means that they're after a person who can use MS Office (or equivilant).
You can't measure computer literacy without a context because "computer" is such a vague term these days and "computers" are used by many people for many different things.
FOr the average office worker it's knowing how to use MS Office. For the Hardware Engineer it means something completely different and for the software developer it's different again.
You can only be "truly computer literate" in the context of a particular field.
It's like asking for a "skilled driver" - skilled to what level? Skilled enough to navigate through suburban traffic or to compete in a Gran Prix?
I agree that it is annoying in general however in XP Pro, installing an application is usually pretty painless.
Just "right click" the installer executable and select the "Run as" option to run the installer as a user with privilages.
I was thinking the same thing... to add to this - How would one be able to predict that vocal cords are even intact from looking at a skeletal structure??
Microsoft announces another edition of Windows Vista; Windows Vista Forever. In celebration of it's release, ID Software and Microsoft are teaming up to release Duke Nukem Forever on the same day!
;-)
Funny that DNF has taken so long, people have forgotten who the developer is!
I wonder if in five years, we'll forget who owned the Vista project and start blaming Linus!
heh, on second thought, maybe we will!