Re:Whatever happened to voting with your feet?
on
Woz on Open Source, DRM
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
>>...If you don't think DRM "makes sense", why on earth have you bought so much DRM-d content and so little DRM-free content?
Because he's a billionaire...
And Apple only sold DRM music until recently.
"Doesn't make sense" is different than "strongly opposed to." Like I said he is a billionaire, and he probably has lot of other stuff on his mind (like more pranks, apparently.) Just because you think something is a bad idea doesn't mean you equate it to Satan. People have different priorities in their life.
Yeah, I guess I don't get his sense of humor at times. Some were funny, but many did not seem like something to boast about. It seems that he just likes to jack with people all day even if there is really no "payoff" from it other than the act itself. I guess I would probably need to know more about him than just the few things I have read.
I think they said the survey included developers in enterprises and system integrators, but I'm not sure whether it means it was limited to these or not.
Is there much of a market for Linux apps? I don't know much about Linux, but it seems like all the stuff I have heard of is free.
An alternative method to effectively freezing your credit is to max out all of your 8 credit cards. It generally works in all states, though your mileage may vary.
After the Virginia Tech shootings, a local radio station interviewed him and kept referring to him as an "expert on school shootings" but never mentioned that his notoriety actually comes from attacking the video game industry. He slipped video game bashing into every other comment. He would talk about some school shooter and remark that he shot everybody in the head like video games train one to do, then a few comments later he would say some shooter had shot everybody 3 times each - just like video games train one to do.
Not only did the interviewer not mention his obsession with video games to begin with, he never even commented on, let alone questioned, all of the repeated video game references.
With the holiday coming on Wednesday this week, I was thinking how cool it would be to have every Wednesday off for just the very reasons you described. I'm surprised that a company actually followed this schedule though.
I thought the dotcom bust came because it was an artificial build-up to begin with - venture capitalists and other investors just throwing bunches of money at companies whose own prospectus said the company had little chance of succeeding.
I'm sure there are natural cycles, but the retiring of baby boomers should should not really lead to an eventual "bust."
I think we see faces because we are wired to be very effective at distinguishing faces. It doesn't mean we really think there is a man in the moon or a face on mars (well not all of us).
I think anthropomorphizing language is a sometimes effective and often convenient way to relate to others, but I don't think this kind of language shapes the science.
I think it is just convenient terminology. We talk about the birth and death of individual stars as well. Anytime an appliance, car, computer, battery, etc... stops working, we say it died.
>>I've read before (can't site it) that in previous ages, time wasn't thought of as linear but as recycling seasons (Pagan?), such as the "circle of life" and nothing more.
I think their would still be a linear concept because a human lifetime is so linear - you start at birth, grow old, then die.
I believe various non-Christian calendars counted off years (or even days) from a beginning point. I think the Mayan calendar even has a last day.
Seasons and cyclical events were important, but I don't know if they would prevent a linear view of time.
It kind of depends on what info they are capturing.
Google keeps track of all your searches, and this seems like this could be more of a privacy concern in some situations. There was a story a while back about some murderer or attempted murderer where they recovered all of his Google searches, which included stuff like "how to murder and not get caught". Not using Google must not have been on the list.
There is some quote about just because you are paranoid doesn't mean someone is not out to get you.
I think the paranoia is more about what info MS is collecting and what they are doing with it. There's probably a low chance of this info being used negatively against you since they don't track your identity, but you never know.
Seems like they would want to keep this data anonymous as much as possible too, or it would seem like they would have an endless barage of subpoenas for civil lawsuits like divorces, where one spouse wants evidence that the other was cheating.
I really don't get why people are harping on points like this...but I will concur that not every single fucking person in the fucking UK will be able to get a free fucking copy of the fucking CD. Okay? But if someone wants the new Prince CD, they should be able to get it. I would imagine part of the point is to get people that don't subscribe to go out and buy the fucking paper. People who would otherwise be willing to go out and buy the CD will go out and buy the paper or buy tickets to one of the many concerts.
This whole tangent argument started because someone was basically saying that Sony-BMG was attacking Prince by not trying to sell the CD in the UK at the same time it he was giving it away for free. This is only relevent because I pointed out that all the actual quotes (in quotation marks) and the general gest of the article concerned *record stores* attacking Prince, not the recording industry. So someone pointed out that the very last sentence of the article mentioned that the UK arm of Sony-BMG would not be distributing the CD, so AHA!, I was wrong and the article really was about the recording industry, not the record stores, attacking Prince. (Of course, if the record industry was truly attacking Prince, it would stop selling all of his CDs, not just the FREE one.)
>>Did you know that there are other countries besides yours?
Yes...I am in the US, the events in question are taking place in UK...UK national paper giving away free Prince CD, everybody in UK wanting a CD gets one for free, UK stores complaining, UK distributer deciding not to distribute...what exactly is your point?
>>IMHO, that's a weak argument. Music is "given away" every day for free over the radio, isn't it? Don't stores sell tons of DVDs of old TV shows that you could record for nothing on TVLAND or some cable station, right?
Say a big movie, like the Tranformers, were to have a big release and come out on DVD. If all you had to do was go buy a newspaper and you got a free copy, don't you think everybody who wanted a copy would just go get one? Would there really be any point trying to sell it at stores at the same time? Would stores really want to promote it and give it shelf space for it's grand premiere if anyone remotely interested or just wanting something for free could go and pick it up with the paper? Even uninterested people who were newspaper subscribers would be getting a free copy. The distributer and the stores would rather devote their attention and shelf space to something else. And, if all the DVD stores told the distributer, fuck this, don't bother, don't you think the distributer would, you know, not bother. It's not to say it would not be available in stores later, but there would be no point in the immediate future.
>>I think the decision is simply what the industry guy said: to punish Prince.
If they wanted to punish Prince, they would pull all of his music - NOT the one CD everybody gets for free anyway.
This is all just a tangent - my point was that it was the record stores attacking Prince, not the recording industry. I thought that would be a more interesting discussion, particulary since it was new and different, and because it was the actual scenario taking place rather than a fictitious scenario that everyone has chosen to talk about.
Sony-BMG was mentioned in the very last sentence of the article, and was basically just additional info while most of the article dealt with quotes from record stores attacking Prince.
(When I tried to point out this out, I got modded down and those that pointed out that Sony-BMG was briefly mentioned in the last sentence quickly got modded up, and Scrameustache quickly put me on his Foes list.)
>>And there will be an infinite supply of free CDs? It's not a one-time promotional event then?
Everybody who want's a CD will get one. It's a national paper, and he's giving them away at the concerts too. They would not sell at stores for at least months later.
What does this have to do with anything anyway? I just pointed out that it was record stores and not the recording industry who was attacking Prince. If you want to ignore all the real quotes and the gest of the article to just dwell on one sentence that involves the recording industry, then like I said, carry on.
Sony-BMG was not one of the quotes about going insane. It just mentioned that the UK arm would not be distributing that particular album to stores. There is kind of no point distributing to stores if it is being given away for free.
I know people are falling all over themselves to attack the recording industry, but I believe everybody quoted in the article are *record stores*, not the recording industry. Carry on.
I believe there are items exempted from this embargo, and particular items can be exempted on a case by case basis. Congress would not have to revoke the law, just add another exception to it.
Slashdot Mirror
>>...If you don't think DRM "makes sense", why on earth have you bought so much DRM-d content and so little DRM-free content?
Because he's a billionaire...
And Apple only sold DRM music until recently.
"Doesn't make sense" is different than "strongly opposed to." Like I said he is a billionaire, and he probably has lot of other stuff on his mind (like more pranks, apparently.) Just because you think something is a bad idea doesn't mean you equate it to Satan. People have different priorities in their life.
Yeah, I guess I don't get his sense of humor at times. Some were funny, but many did not seem like something to boast about. It seems that he just likes to jack with people all day even if there is really no "payoff" from it other than the act itself. I guess I would probably need to know more about him than just the few things I have read.
I think they said the survey included developers in enterprises and system integrators, but I'm not sure whether it means it was limited to these or not.
Is there much of a market for Linux apps? I don't know much about Linux, but it seems like all the stuff I have heard of is free.
It is interesting that in a few of the states listed, only identity theft victims (with a police report) can get this.
An alternative method to effectively freezing your credit is to max out all of your 8 credit cards. It generally works in all states, though your mileage may vary.
After the Virginia Tech shootings, a local radio station interviewed him and kept referring to him as an "expert on school shootings" but never mentioned that his notoriety actually comes from attacking the video game industry. He slipped video game bashing into every other comment. He would talk about some school shooter and remark that he shot everybody in the head like video games train one to do, then a few comments later he would say some shooter had shot everybody 3 times each - just like video games train one to do.
Not only did the interviewer not mention his obsession with video games to begin with, he never even commented on, let alone questioned, all of the repeated video game references.
With the holiday coming on Wednesday this week, I was thinking how cool it would be to have every Wednesday off for just the very reasons you described. I'm surprised that a company actually followed this schedule though.
Small point, and maybe not pertinent, but the article is from Australia, so their might be some exchange rate and other issues.
I thought the dotcom bust came because it was an artificial build-up to begin with - venture capitalists and other investors just throwing bunches of money at companies whose own prospectus said the company had little chance of succeeding.
I'm sure there are natural cycles, but the retiring of baby boomers should should not really lead to an eventual "bust."
I think we see faces because we are wired to be very effective at distinguishing faces. It doesn't mean we really think there is a man in the moon or a face on mars (well not all of us).
I think anthropomorphizing language is a sometimes effective and often convenient way to relate to others, but I don't think this kind of language shapes the science.
I think it is just convenient terminology. We talk about the birth and death of individual stars as well. Anytime an appliance, car, computer, battery, etc... stops working, we say it died.
>>I've read before (can't site it) that in previous ages, time wasn't thought of as linear but as recycling seasons (Pagan?), such as the "circle of life" and nothing more.
I think their would still be a linear concept because a human lifetime is so linear - you start at birth, grow old, then die.
I believe various non-Christian calendars counted off years (or even days) from a beginning point. I think the Mayan calendar even has a last day.
Seasons and cyclical events were important, but I don't know if they would prevent a linear view of time.
It kind of depends on what info they are capturing.
Google keeps track of all your searches, and this seems like this could be more of a privacy concern in some situations. There was a story a while back about some murderer or attempted murderer where they recovered all of his Google searches, which included stuff like "how to murder and not get caught". Not using Google must not have been on the list.
There is some quote about just because you are paranoid doesn't mean someone is not out to get you.
I think the paranoia is more about what info MS is collecting and what they are doing with it. There's probably a low chance of this info being used negatively against you since they don't track your identity, but you never know.
Seems like they would want to keep this data anonymous as much as possible too, or it would seem like they would have an endless barage of subpoenas for civil lawsuits like divorces, where one spouse wants evidence that the other was cheating.
I really don't get why people are harping on points like this...but I will concur that not every single fucking person in the fucking UK will be able to get a free fucking copy of the fucking CD. Okay? But if someone wants the new Prince CD, they should be able to get it. I would imagine part of the point is to get people that don't subscribe to go out and buy the fucking paper. People who would otherwise be willing to go out and buy the CD will go out and buy the paper or buy tickets to one of the many concerts.
This whole tangent argument started because someone was basically saying that Sony-BMG was attacking Prince by not trying to sell the CD in the UK at the same time it he was giving it away for free. This is only relevent because I pointed out that all the actual quotes (in quotation marks) and the general gest of the article concerned *record stores* attacking Prince, not the recording industry. So someone pointed out that the very last sentence of the article mentioned that the UK arm of Sony-BMG would not be distributing the CD, so AHA!, I was wrong and the article really was about the recording industry, not the record stores, attacking Prince. (Of course, if the record industry was truly attacking Prince, it would stop selling all of his CDs, not just the FREE one.)
>>Did you know that there are other countries besides yours?
Yes...I am in the US, the events in question are taking place in UK...UK national paper giving away free Prince CD, everybody in UK wanting a CD gets one for free, UK stores complaining, UK distributer deciding not to distribute...what exactly is your point?
>>IMHO, that's a weak argument. Music is "given away" every day for free over the radio, isn't it? Don't stores sell tons of DVDs of old TV shows that you could record for nothing on TVLAND or some cable station, right?
Say a big movie, like the Tranformers, were to have a big release and come out on DVD. If all you had to do was go buy a newspaper and you got a free copy, don't you think everybody who wanted a copy would just go get one? Would there really be any point trying to sell it at stores at the same time? Would stores really want to promote it and give it shelf space for it's grand premiere if anyone remotely interested or just wanting something for free could go and pick it up with the paper? Even uninterested people who were newspaper subscribers would be getting a free copy. The distributer and the stores would rather devote their attention and shelf space to something else. And, if all the DVD stores told the distributer, fuck this, don't bother, don't you think the distributer would, you know, not bother. It's not to say it would not be available in stores later, but there would be no point in the immediate future.
>>I think the decision is simply what the industry guy said: to punish Prince.
If they wanted to punish Prince, they would pull all of his music - NOT the one CD everybody gets for free anyway.
This is all just a tangent - my point was that it was the record stores attacking Prince, not the recording industry. I thought that would be a more interesting discussion, particulary since it was new and different, and because it was the actual scenario taking place rather than a fictitious scenario that everyone has chosen to talk about.
Sony-BMG was mentioned in the very last sentence of the article, and was basically just additional info while most of the article dealt with quotes from record stores attacking Prince.
(When I tried to point out this out, I got modded down and those that pointed out that Sony-BMG was briefly mentioned in the last sentence quickly got modded up, and Scrameustache quickly put me on his Foes list.)
>>Please smarten up
Sure...
>>And there will be an infinite supply of free CDs? It's not a one-time promotional event then?
Everybody who want's a CD will get one. It's a national paper, and he's giving them away at the concerts too. They would not sell at stores for at least months later.
What does this have to do with anything anyway? I just pointed out that it was record stores and not the recording industry who was attacking Prince. If you want to ignore all the real quotes and the gest of the article to just dwell on one sentence that involves the recording industry, then like I said, carry on.
Sony-BMG was not one of the quotes about going insane. It just mentioned that the UK arm would not be distributing that particular album to stores. There is kind of no point distributing to stores if it is being given away for free.
I know people are falling all over themselves to attack the recording industry, but I believe everybody quoted in the article are *record stores*, not the recording industry. Carry on.
"Allow or Deny?"
yeah, that is kind of close to "Cancel or Allow?"
Is that your twist?
I believe there are items exempted from this embargo, and particular items can be exempted on a case by case basis. Congress would not have to revoke the law, just add another exception to it.
I believe you are correct. Someone thoughtfully moderated your post as underrated to demonstrate.
I thought I have seen some posts with a starting score of 3. How does that work, or was I just imagining that?