You still don't seem to understand what I'm saying.
Merely making a copy of a song increases the supply of that song. Going back to the analogy, the only reason money is "in circulation" is because people use it (and its use requires it to be moved from person to person.) The use part is what is important for this analogy. The use of music doesn't require it to be transferred to others.
"Musical inflation" is analogous to monetary inflation, and is the consequent loss of value of a song due to increases in that song's supply.
I didn't make any ethical claims. I just showed why Overly Critical Guy's rhetoric was flawed. But thank you for thinking of me. Your kind consideration is warmly regarded.
Making an exact replica of a 20 USD bill isn't illegal as such. Well, maybe, but still under copyright laws. Using it instead of real money is what you're hinting at. That, in your analogy would be selling counterfeit CDs. Which is not the point here.
Actually, it is illegal. If you want to make a copy of a bill, it has to be either smaller than three-quarter size, or bigger than one and a half size, or look substantially different. Reproductions must be one-sided. The design of the bill is in the public domain. http://www.bep.treas.gov/document.cfm/18/117
What I was trying to get at is that making an exact replica of money (say, using a Star Trek style replicator) can get you all the free music you want. And everybody involved would be happy, except for the Treasury Department. Your money would be real money to everybody involved, but using it would be morally questionable, because putting it in circulation would cause inflation.
Similarly, making copies of music creates "Musical Inflation".
That ridiculous. It's like saying that murder is unethical regardless of the circumstances.
Murder is always unethical. Homocide, on the other hand, need not be.
If you go kill someone for the hell of it, of course it's unethical, but if you kill someone through unavoidable accident, there's not really any unethical aspect to consider.
The first is murder. The latter is "just" homocide.
I'm not unsympathetic to your position. But there are cases when making and using a copy of a physical object are strictly illegal and at least arguably immoral. Like making a duplicate of a twenty dollar bill.
Now, assuming you could actually make an exact replica of a twenty dollar bill, it wouldn't even be stealing if you went to a store and bought a copy of a CD you were considering pirating. As far as the store and the bank are concerned, they got paid. But I would argue that using counterfeit bills is at least morally questionable.
Why is making a counterfeit Madonna album any different?
I guess you missed the word "ethically" in my signature. I know you're attempting the tried-and-true "it's not theft because you're not physically taking anything" canard, but then why do all Slashdotters refer to "stolen GPL code" all the time?
Equivocation. Likely because the people who talk about "Stolen GPL Code" aren't the same people who talk about piracy. If you're going to argue with someone, argue on the merits of their arguments, not the arguments of others.
And he obviously didn't miss the word "ethically". His point was that ethically, piracy is not like stealing, since piracy is not like stealing in its essential character. Indeed, he came up with an analogy to piracy, and showed that stealing and piracy are ethically very different.
The current administration is certainly full of liars, but just as certainly not idiots.
Can you explain how sites like DailyKOS, MoveOn, and their contributors are still up and running, despite all their constant condemnation of the government, with little to no repercussions on the owners/operators of said websites? Can you explain how popular meetings and demonstrations like the Impeach Bush rallies up in San Francisco that seem to occur almost every weekend can go on without any government interference (other than the local police for traffic/safety reasons)?
Rome was the ideal Germany tried to live up to. Can you explain how orators like Tacitus, Suetonius, and Cicero wrote and spoke damning condemnations of the Roman government with little interference?
Can you explain the orgies thrown by the subversive Cult of Bacchanalia?
Bread and circuses. People keep themselves pacified through limited forms of expression and, face it, entertainment. Why would a government interfere?
Now compare the US to say, Venezuela and its ruler, Cesar Chavez. Which one do you really think has more in common with Nazi Germany?
The United States. Don't kid yourself. There's very little Nazi Germany did that the US hasn't done in its history. If you don't think so, read the Family Jewels report declassified by the CIA yesterday. They're admittedly our version of the Gestapo.
They showed the same results to different people and asked them to rate the quality of the results. The result samples with Google and Yahoo! logos scored better than MSN.
Pretty nasty. Indicates that this guy is unlucky on an astronomical scale, or environmental factors are to blame, or a lot more than 5% of the machines are defective. (Inclusive-or's)
Probability of n particular people getting 11 straight defective machines: p^n. So 2 people is 1/(20^22). There are lots of pairs of people among the population P of XBox buyers, so the probability of any two getting 11 straight defective machines is (P choose 2) * p^2. Any n is (P choose n) p^n.
Hey, do I actually have to care about the FSF to get one of those c00l fsf.org email addresses? I need a new permanent email provider and fsf.org would be teh shizznikegnite. Think of all the geek cred.
On the other hand, there are only so many known mechanisms for lake formation. The surrounding geology eliminates many of those. And it sounds like their negative evidence eliminates many more.
No. They eliminated everything else they could imagine that would explain it, and therefore concluded (in the words of the project lead) that it was an impact crater. Not "think it might be", but "believe that it is".
On the basis of our knowledge of lakes and their geology, they eliminated every possibility but an impact crater. Therefore, on the basis of our knowledge of lakes and their geology, we can deduce (conclude! a synonym!) that it is an impact crater.
This is no more provisional than even having positive evidence, since the interpretation of positive evidence will depend upon our knowlege of lakes and their geology. In either case, if our knowlege about lakes and their geology changed in a way that affects analysis, all bets are off.
Well, the real worst case is the complete and utter destruction of the universe immediately after you read this post. But, like your prediction, it is an unlikely case.
Are you honestly claiming that you can hear frequencies higher than 22.050 kHz?
Actually, yes. I can. Last time I had my hearing tested, I heard frequencies up to 24.5kHz.
Careless, thoughtless production and over-processing I can all too readily believe in, but not problems with the essential theory at the heart of it.
The trouble with the theory is that it is just that. The theory of using low pass filters to smooth out quantized signals works very well. In practice, however, low pass filters have to be matched to a proper power output stage, or else you get slewing, and a corresponding spectral shift.
Seriously, get your hands on an oscilloscope and a cheap CD player. You'll be able to measure frequencies into the 25kHz range coming out of the power output, despite Nysquist's sampling theorem. This directly corresponds to information loss in the audible range.
2 inch tape is still the best recording medium ever made.
In what model? I know of models where 2 + 2 = 0. 2 + 2 = 1 is also possible. 2 + 2 = 5 isn't possible in the kinds of models I'm thinking of, since 2 and 5 are co-prime. But 2+2+2+2+2 = 5 is easy.
If I was to assert that "2+2=5", and try to put up a figleaf that "it's my opinion", that doesn't stop me from being wrong.
But except for your lucky choice in example, he would be as right as you are when you say 2 + 2 = 4.
At this point, KDE, gnome, Apache.org, and a bunch of others have done at least as much for Linux (as a trademark) (per SLOC) as GNU. A solid compiler tool chain is nice, but so is a nice GUI. And server software. And databases.
So I'm off to download a copy of KDE/Apache/Samba/mysql/(k)ubunto/GNU/Linux.
Slashdot Mirror
All the fanboyism and taunting and one-upsmanship and told-you-sos are worth exactly zero dollars.
If what you said was true, neither Intel nor AMD would spend a dime on marketting.
You still don't seem to understand what I'm saying.
Merely making a copy of a song increases the supply of that song. Going back to the analogy, the only reason money is "in circulation" is because people use it (and its use requires it to be moved from person to person.) The use part is what is important for this analogy. The use of music doesn't require it to be transferred to others.
"Musical inflation" is analogous to monetary inflation, and is the consequent loss of value of a song due to increases in that song's supply.
American Heritage
Homicide
http://www.answers.com/homicide
1. The killing of one person by another.
2. A person who kills another person.
Murder
http://www.answers.com/murder
1.The unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice.
Merriam-Webster
Homicide
http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/homicide
1 : a person who kills another
2 : a killing of one human being by another
Murder
http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/murder
1.The crime of unlawfully killing a person especially with malice aforethought
I need to practice my spelling, you need a better dictionary. I'd rather be in my position than in yours.
I didn't make any ethical claims. I just showed why Overly Critical Guy's rhetoric was flawed. But thank you for thinking of me. Your kind consideration is warmly regarded.
And music you might buy with a $20 bill doesn't?
Making an exact replica of a 20 USD bill isn't illegal as such. Well, maybe, but still under copyright laws. Using it instead of real money is what you're hinting at. That, in your analogy would be selling counterfeit CDs. Which is not the point here.
Actually, it is illegal. If you want to make a copy of a bill, it has to be either smaller than three-quarter size, or bigger than one and a half size, or look substantially different. Reproductions must be one-sided. The design of the bill is in the public domain. http://www.bep.treas.gov/document.cfm/18/117
What I was trying to get at is that making an exact replica of money (say, using a Star Trek style replicator) can get you all the free music you want. And everybody involved would be happy, except for the Treasury Department. Your money would be real money to everybody involved, but using it would be morally questionable, because putting it in circulation would cause inflation.
Similarly, making copies of music creates "Musical Inflation".
That ridiculous. It's like saying that murder is unethical regardless of the circumstances.
Murder is always unethical. Homocide, on the other hand, need not be.
If you go kill someone for the hell of it, of course it's unethical, but if you kill someone through unavoidable accident, there's not really any unethical aspect to consider.
The first is murder. The latter is "just" homocide.
I'm not unsympathetic to your position. But there are cases when making and using a copy of a physical object are strictly illegal and at least arguably immoral. Like making a duplicate of a twenty dollar bill.
Now, assuming you could actually make an exact replica of a twenty dollar bill, it wouldn't even be stealing if you went to a store and bought a copy of a CD you were considering pirating. As far as the store and the bank are concerned, they got paid. But I would argue that using counterfeit bills is at least morally questionable.
Why is making a counterfeit Madonna album any different?
I guess you missed the word "ethically" in my signature. I know you're attempting the tried-and-true "it's not theft because you're not physically taking anything" canard, but then why do all Slashdotters refer to "stolen GPL code" all the time?
Equivocation. Likely because the people who talk about "Stolen GPL Code" aren't the same people who talk about piracy. If you're going to argue with someone, argue on the merits of their arguments, not the arguments of others.
And he obviously didn't miss the word "ethically". His point was that ethically, piracy is not like stealing, since piracy is not like stealing in its essential character. Indeed, he came up with an analogy to piracy, and showed that stealing and piracy are ethically very different.
You'll probably feign
The current administration is certainly full of liars, but just as certainly not idiots.
Can you explain how sites like DailyKOS, MoveOn, and their contributors are still up and running, despite all their constant condemnation of the government, with little to no repercussions on the owners/operators of said websites?
Can you explain how popular meetings and demonstrations like the Impeach Bush rallies up in San Francisco that seem to occur almost every weekend can go on without any government interference (other than the local police for traffic/safety reasons)?
Rome was the ideal Germany tried to live up to. Can you explain how orators like Tacitus, Suetonius, and Cicero wrote and spoke damning condemnations of the Roman government with little interference?
Can you explain the orgies thrown by the subversive Cult of Bacchanalia?
Bread and circuses. People keep themselves pacified through limited forms of expression and, face it, entertainment. Why would a government interfere?
Now compare the US to say, Venezuela and its ruler, Cesar Chavez. Which one do you really think has more in common with Nazi Germany?
The United States. Don't kid yourself. There's very little Nazi Germany did that the US hasn't done in its history. If you don't think so, read the Family Jewels report declassified by the CIA yesterday. They're admittedly our version of the Gestapo.
Fascism and libertarianism are on the same side of the economic spectrum.
Dude, you don't get it.
They showed the same results to different people and asked them to rate the quality of the results. The result samples with Google and Yahoo! logos scored better than MSN.
Uh, p = 1/(20^11).
Pretty nasty. Indicates that this guy is unlucky on an astronomical scale, or environmental factors are to blame, or a lot more than 5% of the machines are defective. (Inclusive-or's)
Probability of n particular people getting 11 straight defective machines: p^n. So 2 people is 1/(20^22). There are lots of pairs of people among the population P of XBox buyers, so the probability of any two getting 11 straight defective machines is (P choose 2) * p^2. Any n is (P choose n) p^n.
http://www-03.ibm.com/systems/bladecenter/power-ba sed.html
As joking as my tone was, I was interested. Thank you.
Get with the times. Hermione dies.
Hey, do I actually have to care about the FSF to get one of those c00l fsf.org email addresses? I need a new permanent email provider and fsf.org would be teh shizznikegnite. Think of all the geek cred.
After starting Azureus, I want my three minutes back.
On the other hand, there are only so many known mechanisms for lake formation. The surrounding geology eliminates many of those. And it sounds like their negative evidence eliminates many more.
No. They eliminated everything else they could imagine that would explain it, and therefore concluded (in the words of the project lead) that it was an impact crater. Not "think it might be", but "believe that it is".
On the basis of our knowledge of lakes and their geology, they eliminated every possibility but an impact crater. Therefore, on the basis of our knowledge of lakes and their geology, we can deduce (conclude! a synonym!) that it is an impact crater.
This is no more provisional than even having positive evidence, since the interpretation of positive evidence will depend upon our knowlege of lakes and their geology. In either case, if our knowlege about lakes and their geology changed in a way that affects analysis, all bets are off.
Welcome to Logic 101.
Well, the real worst case is the complete and utter destruction of the universe immediately after you read this post. But, like your prediction, it is an unlikely case.
Yes, if there aren't too many ambient noises. But it's not hard to tune out.
Are you honestly claiming that you can hear frequencies higher than 22.050 kHz?
Actually, yes. I can. Last time I had my hearing tested, I heard frequencies up to 24.5kHz.
Careless, thoughtless production and over-processing I can all too readily believe in, but not problems with the essential theory at the heart of it.
The trouble with the theory is that it is just that. The theory of using low pass filters to smooth out quantized signals works very well. In practice, however, low pass filters have to be matched to a proper power output stage, or else you get slewing, and a corresponding spectral shift.
Seriously, get your hands on an oscilloscope and a cheap CD player. You'll be able to measure frequencies into the 25kHz range coming out of the power output, despite Nysquist's sampling theorem. This directly corresponds to information loss in the audible range.
2 inch tape is still the best recording medium ever made.
It is not my opinion that 2+2=4; that is a fact.
In what model? I know of models where 2 + 2 = 0. 2 + 2 = 1 is also possible. 2 + 2 = 5 isn't possible in the kinds of models I'm thinking of, since 2 and 5 are co-prime. But 2+2+2+2+2 = 5 is easy.
If I was to assert that "2+2=5", and try to put up a figleaf that "it's my opinion", that doesn't stop me from being wrong.
But except for your lucky choice in example, he would be as right as you are when you say 2 + 2 = 4.
At this point, KDE, gnome, Apache.org, and a bunch of others have done at least as much for Linux (as a trademark) (per SLOC) as GNU. A solid compiler tool chain is nice, but so is a nice GUI. And server software. And databases.
So I'm off to download a copy of KDE/Apache/Samba/mysql/(k)ubunto/GNU/Linux.