They're both illegal... the only real difference is that one has a profit motive, and the other doesn't. But the actual level of illegality, under current law, is about equal. It's illogical to praise one and not the other, don't succumb to the same stupidity that is rife within the **AA.
which concerns the relative morality of filesharing vs. pirating cds for profit. I also think it's valid to involve the end users, since they're the ones who are buying or not buying legit cds.
I have no answer to people downloading whole albums instead of buying them, but I'd be interested to see what their numbers are now and how that would change if there was a better/cheaper distribution system and it was harder to find whole albums online. I like to think download-instead-of-buy is more of a fringe problem (or at least, that most people download a few songs instead of pay for 8 they don't like), and that it's limited to the 1) music should be free and 2) can't find a good music store demographics, but again, I know that's probably wishful thinking.
If the main processor can no longer be relied on to become continually faster to support perpetual feature bloat and inefficiency, how long until someone offers a FBPU?
You've got to feel sorry for Clear Channel, though. They worked so hard to develop a monopoly on (semi-)free previews of music and had so much trouble illegally leveraging it with the help of the RIAA with payola, and then some dirty commie hacker came up with an alternative that's completely free, easy to use, provides better quality, is on demand, and is far more versatile.
Is devolving even possible? I mean, isn't evolution (grossly oversimplified) just those members of a species who have the most babies passing on the traits that cause them to have the most babies? So devolving would be the ones who have the least babies having the most babies...
Unless of course you're applying a value judgement to the relative worth of different means of survival.
I wonder what effect hiring the Star Trek techno babble writers would have on science jounralism...
I think the main difference (in this case) between bootleggers and filesharers is that pirated cds are just an illegal extension of the current distribution process, whereas filesharing could be a whole new method of distribution (if the RIAA/MTV/Clear Channel didn't have a monopoly on making bands famous).
Ok, it's a weak defense as things stand now, but maybe if a few good bands become nationally known through online music sharing (mp3 blogs, anyone?) it'll earn some validity.
As an alternative, I should mention population density and cost of living. Living in a decent sized city, there are generally lots of record stores and, more importantly, used cd stores. Not living in a decent sized city, like most of the country, it's more difficult (in my admittedly limited experience, correct me if it's not the case) to find a good used cd store, and filesharing is no more difficult than anywhere else (especially with the spread of broadband). Cost of living is generally higher in larger cities, too, and therefore wages are generally higher and people have more to spend on cds, which AFAIK are priced relatively uniformly across the country.
If I buy a pirated CD, I've already exchanged money for goods. There's basically no chance that I'll later buy a legit copy because I already have some physical media. If I download 2 or 3 songs (or an album) by an artist, and find their CD for sale at a reasonable price, I'm more likely to buy it than if I hadn't heard any of their music.
I don't see why two things being equally illegal makes them morally equivalent.
It's not a question of "are they in your future", it's "how far are they in your future, and how many kids did you have to sell to get one bigger than your neighbors'".
Can't you get around some similar problems with programs that don't have installers? I know it's sidestepping the specific problems mentioned in the article, but that was why I used Trillian when I was stuck "working" in the computer lab.
From the article: "There are some necessary economies of scale in the processor market, and they need to be about 10 times larger than they are," said Dean McCarron, principal analyst at Mercury Research.
Although Mandrakesoft's main focus has been to make Linux available to the largest number of users, the company has also acknowledged, very early, that Linux required specific adaptations to be functional in a business environment.
"Hey you guys, with all the money? Those free Linuxes, they're no good for you. You'd better pay us to write 'Business Edition' on the box."
Slashdot Mirror
"Fight the Lego monopoly: build sand castles."
GTPlanet.net car list
which concerns the relative morality of filesharing vs. pirating cds for profit. I also think it's valid to involve the end users, since they're the ones who are buying or not buying legit cds.
I have no answer to people downloading whole albums instead of buying them, but I'd be interested to see what their numbers are now and how that would change if there was a better/cheaper distribution system and it was harder to find whole albums online. I like to think download-instead-of-buy is more of a fringe problem (or at least, that most people download a few songs instead of pay for 8 they don't like), and that it's limited to the 1) music should be free and 2) can't find a good music store demographics, but again, I know that's probably wishful thinking.
If the main processor can no longer be relied on to become continually faster to support perpetual feature bloat and inefficiency, how long until someone offers a FBPU?
You've got to feel sorry for Clear Channel, though. They worked so hard to develop a monopoly on (semi-)free previews of music and had so much trouble illegally leveraging it with the help of the RIAA with payola, and then some dirty commie hacker came up with an alternative that's completely free, easy to use, provides better quality, is on demand, and is far more versatile.
Unless of course you're applying a value judgement to the relative worth of different means of survival.
I wonder what effect hiring the Star Trek techno babble writers would have on science jounralism...
I give it a year (two, tops) before NetBSD will run on standard powerlines.
Ok, it's a weak defense as things stand now, but maybe if a few good bands become nationally known through online music sharing (mp3 blogs, anyone?) it'll earn some validity.
As an alternative, I should mention population density and cost of living. Living in a decent sized city, there are generally lots of record stores and, more importantly, used cd stores. Not living in a decent sized city, like most of the country, it's more difficult (in my admittedly limited experience, correct me if it's not the case) to find a good used cd store, and filesharing is no more difficult than anywhere else (especially with the spread of broadband). Cost of living is generally higher in larger cities, too, and therefore wages are generally higher and people have more to spend on cds, which AFAIK are priced relatively uniformly across the country.
I don't see why two things being equally illegal makes them morally equivalent.
The RIAA should just sell their CDs for $5 through shady looking guys on the street.
But can the coffee maker shoot Bobs?
I think the real question is, "people still use Java?"
It's not a question of "are they in your future", it's "how far are they in your future, and how many kids did you have to sell to get one bigger than your neighbors'".
If you wanted a 24x36 you'd need a medium format camera, though.
O'Reilly On Java seems much more straightforward than the two links in the writeup, although I just googled "aspect oriented programming intro"...
Can't you get around some similar problems with programs that don't have installers? I know it's sidestepping the specific problems mentioned in the article, but that was why I used Trillian when I was stuck "working" in the computer lab.
From the article: "There are some necessary economies of scale in the processor market, and they need to be about 10 times larger than they are," said Dean McCarron, principal analyst at Mercury Research.
Maybe they're going to use the lower-end PDAs to list name-brand drugs and how many years salary each one costs.
It doesn't matter if gasoline typewriters exist, just where you can download NetBSD for them.
Well, it is a subscription. Maybe they're afraid managers won't feel like they got their money's worth if there isn't an update every 2 1/2 months.
It's cheaper than a trial.
That, and web browsers are apps.
Any plans for one? Otherwise it'll be hard for me to form an opinion of my own.
"Hey you guys, with all the money? Those free Linuxes, they're no good for you. You'd better pay us to write 'Business Edition' on the box."
--<#)