Lawyers have a responsibility to suggest every possible counter-argument to their opponent's argument, and to cast doubts on the credibility of those arguing against them. So a little hyperbole and bullshit is to be expected. However, past a certain point, the bullshit becomes too blatant to be productive, and may actually become counter-productive. Many believe the RIAA passed that point so long ago, they can't find there way back to it. I suspect Ray uses hyperbole in arguing his points as well, but at least he is familiar with the meaning of the word "subtle"
Let me put it this way: I was once sued in small claims court where I told the absolute truth, while the plaintiff lied through her teeth the whole time. Eg. Her: "He hasn't given me a dime!" Me: "You honor, I have the canceled checks right here." At any rate, the judge simply assumed both sides were lying equally, and split the difference, awarding her approximately half of what she was asking for (and not giving any math or logic to support this decision.) The point is, if you are not willing to stoop to the same level as opposing counsel, then you are not acting in your client's best interests. (Up to the point where your opponent does something illegal, of course. Then your best course of action is to document the illegal or unethical behavior to the best of your ability.)
Darn it, Ray... now I'm beginning to suspect that YOU have some sort of bias against the RIAA too!;-) Isn't saying "lack of honesty" and "RIAA lawyers" a bit... redundant?
I am shocked and amazed that the people who filed an amicus curiae brief opposing the RIAA's actions in court are all actually members of organizations with a history of opposing the RIAA!!! We cannot allow this bias to continue! Anyone submitting an amicus curiae brief should first have to prove that they no particular bias towards either side of the argument! Look, it is by definition an adversarial relationship; it is a lawyer's job to paint their opponents in as poor a light as possible. Any judge who can't see through this blatant hyperbole doesn't deserve to sit on the bench.
As far as the "pending sanctions motion", anybody can _request_ sanctions against opposing counsel - I've done it myself, when somebody suing me for $500,000 couldn't even be bothered to meet the court imposed deadlines. A pending motion is standard operating procedure. Get back to me when a judge actually imposes sanctions -- that is much more rare.
Most of the electronics in development will now soon be available on the Chinese market at a much cheaper price, and long before the American contractors finish their development. Meaning we can get these birds up much quicker and at a much lower price now! (Provided we don't mind the fact that the reliability and testing of the parts for the missile guidance system is slightly less than that for a cheap Fisher-Price toy!)
Recharging is tough in the field. What?!? Don't Humvees have cigarette lighter sockets? Next you'll be telling me the military version doesn't even have cupholders!
Nothing is completely free of cost. Even if a licensed executable is available for free, there is still your time to download and install it. Also, for a business things like support costs, costs of re-writing inhouse apps for a new OS, and costs of retraining every user for a new OS usually apply. These costs apply to switching to Linux, but also apply to upgrading from XP to Vista.
If you are starting from scratch, Windows and Linux are fairly competitive. Linux includes support for more things out of the box. Windows has better help files. Good Windows admins are probably easier to find and pay for. Windows systems are designed based on the assumption that the user is stupid and needs to have everything done for them, and thus results in a "one size fits all" product. Open source is usually designed with the assumption that the user will want to tweak everything imaginable in to software, even though to process for doing so is poorly documented. Windows has better support for brand new devices; Linux has better support for older devices. Windows has much more antivirus software available because it NEEDS it!
In conclusion, Open Source _should_ compete on value; for embedded devices and servers, I believe it has a better value proposition. For desktops, assuming all your users are already familiar with Windows, it isn't as competitive. If I was going to start a bunch of people who know nothing about computers out, I'd train them on Linux. But the Windows legacy is a fact of the industry, so the correct approach is to use the correct tool for the job and to strive for interoperability on all sides. Microsoft is at least giving lip service to interoperability lately; and that is something that actually does provide value to customers. Lock-in does not.
My most productive coding environment is any one in which I don't have access to slashdot! But seriously, I need closed doors so I'm not subjecting to interruptions, and fast 'net access for googling for solutions to problems rather then figuring them out by myself.
You also need a viable music recommendation system; if people have never heard of these good indie musicians, then they wont bother to download them. I've used pandora, and it has turned me on to Eva Cassidy and Makana (your tastes may vary), as well as reminded me of many others that are not yet in my collection. Once we get music recommendations that the mainstream trusts, then indie musicians will eventually get a larger market share, but it will take time. There are literally thousands of aspiring artists out there that are much better than 99% of the crap put out by RIAA members. For the most part, people prefer to listen to whatever they are used to. (This isn't always true; I grew up being forcibly subjected to country music, and with a few exceptions, I still can't stand it.)
The other problem is that the truly great musicians out there are usually interested in ALL kinds of music; they defy classification by genre, and thus don't fit into the record label's boilerplate marketing plans. So the people that are into music solely for love of music seldom get promoted. Even well-established artists can't sell music that doesn't fit their "mold"; how many people have even heard of Bruce Springsteen's "Nebraska" or "The Ghost of Tom Joad" albums? (His best work, IMHO.)
Really? Last time I checked, HP was doing quite well, even outselling Dell. Despite the recent corporate sanctioned hacking of reporter's computers and impersonating board members to gain access to their phone records. Oh wait, is that considered legal now?
I've been saying for years that any system wherein you can use as much as you want of a shared resource as you want for a single, fixed price inherently suffers from "The Tragedy of the Commons" problems, and that the internet must inevitably adopt some sort of "pay per byte" business model. I even think the multi-tier model makes more sense than counting every byte. My only objection is that as a consumer I would like to know in advance how much my bill will be every month (makes it a lot easier to stay on budget), and thus the consumer should have the option of choosing either reduced access or getting bumped into a higher cost tier when they exceed a bandwidth limit. Hughes Net satellite internet only gives you the first option, it automatically degrades your connection to less than dial-up bandwidth for 24 hours every time you download too many bytes. Yeah, I'd prefer to know how many bytes the limit is, and get some sort of warning when I'm approaching it, but the truth remains it is a shared resource, which justifies "punishing" those that use more than others.
I was thinking more along the lines of how most motorists walk away from a collision with negative emotions, even if it isn't the fault of the car itself. Do you remember how your feelings for your bright, shiny new car changed the first time somebody slammed their door into it in a parking lot? Suddenly, it wasn't "bright", "shiny" or "new" anymore -- it was just "car".
Right now, I have a lot more respect for Ford than for GM or Chrysler. They are not going bankrupt, and the new Fusion Hybrid looks to actually be a decent car. But if the marketing drones an GM or Chrysler can actually locate these blogger cars and sabotage them, then Ford is going to have a Public Relations nightmare on their hands.
every problem with Microsoft products must be attributed to the user Exactly... if the user is stupid enough to use Microsoft products, then he or she deserves whatever they get!
Personally, I see this as a tacit admission by Microsoft that Google is a much better search engine for finding porn on the internet than live.com!
It is for encouraging piracy plain and simple.
They are "encouraging piracy" in the same way that telephone directories are encouraging obscene and harassing phone calls. To date, nobody has held the directory publishers criminally or civilly responsible for calls facilitated by the information they distribute.
TPB will remove a link to copyrighted material if you simply request it. US phone companies, on the other hand, require you to PAY A MONTHLY FEE for the privilege of not having your number listed in the directory. I think the torrent index sites are missing out on a potentially huge source of revenue here -- they should demand that the RIAA/MPAA pay them to not index their copyrighted material!
"Encouraging piracy" is what the lack of an effective government in Somalia does. Sense the RIAA/MPAA think it is appropriate to use a totally irrelevant pejorative term for unauthorized distribution of copyrighted material to make it sound more like a criminal than a civil matter, I say from now on we should insist on using the term "anal-raping your customers" to describe the RIAAs efforts to sue downloaders. By the RIAA's own standards, it is every bit as appropriate as their use of the term "piracy".
Slashdot Mirror
Since the dawn of computer communications, there has always been a single valid answer to that question: porn.
"When you stare into the abyss the abyss stares back at you." -- Friedrich Nietzsche
For some reason, goatse.cx always reminds me of that quote...
Lawyers have a responsibility to suggest every possible counter-argument to their opponent's argument, and to cast doubts on the credibility of those arguing against them. So a little hyperbole and bullshit is to be expected. However, past a certain point, the bullshit becomes too blatant to be productive, and may actually become counter-productive. Many believe the RIAA passed that point so long ago, they can't find there way back to it. I suspect Ray uses hyperbole in arguing his points as well, but at least he is familiar with the meaning of the word "subtle"
Let me put it this way: I was once sued in small claims court where I told the absolute truth, while the plaintiff lied through her teeth the whole time. Eg. Her: "He hasn't given me a dime!" Me: "You honor, I have the canceled checks right here." At any rate, the judge simply assumed both sides were lying equally, and split the difference, awarding her approximately half of what she was asking for (and not giving any math or logic to support this decision.) The point is, if you are not willing to stoop to the same level as opposing counsel, then you are not acting in your client's best interests. (Up to the point where your opponent does something illegal, of course. Then your best course of action is to document the illegal or unethical behavior to the best of your ability.)
Darn it, Ray... now I'm beginning to suspect that YOU have some sort of bias against the RIAA too! ;-) Isn't saying "lack of honesty" and "RIAA lawyers" a bit... redundant?
My wife cares... trust me, she cares!
I am shocked and amazed that the people who filed an amicus curiae brief opposing the RIAA's actions in court are all actually members of organizations with a history of opposing the RIAA!!! We cannot allow this bias to continue! Anyone submitting an amicus curiae brief should first have to prove that they no particular bias towards either side of the argument! Look, it is by definition an adversarial relationship; it is a lawyer's job to paint their opponents in as poor a light as possible. Any judge who can't see through this blatant hyperbole doesn't deserve to sit on the bench.
As far as the "pending sanctions motion", anybody can _request_ sanctions against opposing counsel - I've done it myself, when somebody suing me for $500,000 couldn't even be bothered to meet the court imposed deadlines. A pending motion is standard operating procedure. Get back to me when a judge actually imposes sanctions -- that is much more rare.
If you or I were to do things like that, then we'd be called lying assholes... but if a lawyer does it, then he is simply doing his job.
Three shots. Three kills. That's how SEALS deal with pirates! Yes, those are definitely NOT the people you want to be angry at you.
True, but he IS one of the few CEOs that has his own usenet newsgroup: alt.balmer.developers.developers.developers!
Most of the electronics in development will now soon be available on the Chinese market at a much cheaper price, and long before the American contractors finish their development. Meaning we can get these birds up much quicker and at a much lower price now! (Provided we don't mind the fact that the reliability and testing of the parts for the missile guidance system is slightly less than that for a cheap Fisher-Price toy!)
Any guesses as to what the Nigerian student will be working on?
This makes me want to run out and buy some new HAM gear so I can talk for free to Brazilian bikini models! "Tu amore!"
Try googling "anal retentive". ;-)
Can I use the waste heat from an electric motor to charge the battery that run the motor?
Recharging is tough in the field. What?!? Don't Humvees have cigarette lighter sockets? Next you'll be telling me the military version doesn't even have cupholders!
If you are starting from scratch, Windows and Linux are fairly competitive. Linux includes support for more things out of the box. Windows has better help files. Good Windows admins are probably easier to find and pay for. Windows systems are designed based on the assumption that the user is stupid and needs to have everything done for them, and thus results in a "one size fits all" product. Open source is usually designed with the assumption that the user will want to tweak everything imaginable in to software, even though to process for doing so is poorly documented. Windows has better support for brand new devices; Linux has better support for older devices. Windows has much more antivirus software available because it NEEDS it!
In conclusion, Open Source _should_ compete on value; for embedded devices and servers, I believe it has a better value proposition. For desktops, assuming all your users are already familiar with Windows, it isn't as competitive. If I was going to start a bunch of people who know nothing about computers out, I'd train them on Linux. But the Windows legacy is a fact of the industry, so the correct approach is to use the correct tool for the job and to strive for interoperability on all sides. Microsoft is at least giving lip service to interoperability lately; and that is something that actually does provide value to customers. Lock-in does not.
My most productive coding environment is any one in which I don't have access to slashdot! But seriously, I need closed doors so I'm not subjecting to interruptions, and fast 'net access for googling for solutions to problems rather then figuring them out by myself.
The other problem is that the truly great musicians out there are usually interested in ALL kinds of music; they defy classification by genre, and thus don't fit into the record label's boilerplate marketing plans. So the people that are into music solely for love of music seldom get promoted. Even well-established artists can't sell music that doesn't fit their "mold"; how many people have even heard of Bruce Springsteen's "Nebraska" or "The Ghost of Tom Joad" albums? (His best work, IMHO.)
Really? Last time I checked, HP was doing quite well, even outselling Dell. Despite the recent corporate sanctioned hacking of reporter's computers and impersonating board members to gain access to their phone records. Oh wait, is that considered legal now?
I've been saying for years that any system wherein you can use as much as you want of a shared resource as you want for a single, fixed price inherently suffers from "The Tragedy of the Commons" problems, and that the internet must inevitably adopt some sort of "pay per byte" business model. I even think the multi-tier model makes more sense than counting every byte. My only objection is that as a consumer I would like to know in advance how much my bill will be every month (makes it a lot easier to stay on budget), and thus the consumer should have the option of choosing either reduced access or getting bumped into a higher cost tier when they exceed a bandwidth limit. Hughes Net satellite internet only gives you the first option, it automatically degrades your connection to less than dial-up bandwidth for 24 hours every time you download too many bytes. Yeah, I'd prefer to know how many bytes the limit is, and get some sort of warning when I'm approaching it, but the truth remains it is a shared resource, which justifies "punishing" those that use more than others.
I was thinking more along the lines of how most motorists walk away from a collision with negative emotions, even if it isn't the fault of the car itself. Do you remember how your feelings for your bright, shiny new car changed the first time somebody slammed their door into it in a parking lot? Suddenly, it wasn't "bright", "shiny" or "new" anymore -- it was just "car".
Right now, I have a lot more respect for Ford than for GM or Chrysler. They are not going bankrupt, and the new Fusion Hybrid looks to actually be a decent car. But if the marketing drones an GM or Chrysler can actually locate these blogger cars and sabotage them, then Ford is going to have a Public Relations nightmare on their hands.
Human/tree ... hybrids would also still be legal. Just what the world needs -- more Al Gores!
Personally, I see this as a tacit admission by Microsoft that Google is a much better search engine for finding porn on the internet than live.com!
It is for encouraging piracy plain and simple.
They are "encouraging piracy" in the same way that telephone directories are encouraging obscene and harassing phone calls. To date, nobody has held the directory publishers criminally or civilly responsible for calls facilitated by the information they distribute.
TPB will remove a link to copyrighted material if you simply request it. US phone companies, on the other hand, require you to PAY A MONTHLY FEE for the privilege of not having your number listed in the directory. I think the torrent index sites are missing out on a potentially huge source of revenue here -- they should demand that the RIAA/MPAA pay them to not index their copyrighted material!
"Encouraging piracy" is what the lack of an effective government in Somalia does. Sense the RIAA/MPAA think it is appropriate to use a totally irrelevant pejorative term for unauthorized distribution of copyrighted material to make it sound more like a criminal than a civil matter, I say from now on we should insist on using the term "anal-raping your customers" to describe the RIAAs efforts to sue downloaders. By the RIAA's own standards, it is every bit as appropriate as their use of the term "piracy".