Adobe Photoshop, which is a standard program that lots of people need
That is not true. Photoshop is designed for graphics professionals, not the average user. That's why Adobe has Photoshop Elements, which is bundled with many scanners and can be purchased for $84.
The truth is, almost all sofware is not priced too expensively for the markets they target. The problem is that users are greedy. They want to have lots of programs, more than they would normally use, and they also want to have programs that are high-end just to have them. No, the real reason why people pirate software is because they can.
Students also get significant discounts on software. I don't know of any major piece of software that costs $500 for a student. For instance, the academic price for Photoshop 7 (full) is $300, which is less than half of the MSRP.
I'm talking about an across-the-board plan where I don't have to care about the label. I went to SlamJamz records, and they don't provide a list of artists of sample songs for me to try out before I sign up. Not that it matters, from what little I saw I don't think I'll like anything they have to offer.
Kazaa lobbyist Phil Corwin says a $1-a-month fee per user on Internet providers alone (it's unclear whether costs would be passed along to subscribers)
Of course the cost will be passed along to subscribers. How can that not be clear? Only a moron would willing give up $1/user/month and get nothing out of it. The ISPs don't gain anything from this venture. If anything, they lose because it will encourage more Internet activity and increase the bandwith costs. So if anything, the subscribers will pay more than $1/month.
Frankly, I don't understand why I can't just buy the music directly from the artists, at $1/song.
Same here. In fact every time we FF through commercials and my wife glimpses a half-naked man, she makes me rewind. That Sprint PCS commercial with the soap opera actor is her favorite.
Broadcasters should not be afraid of PVRs. If anything, I watch more TV, and hence more commercials, than before. So what if I FF through them? Even at 60x speed, I recognize 90% of them because I've seen them already! Because the FF feature requires good eye-hand control, I need to pay extra attention to the TV.
How can it be unethical if the license specifically allows for something like that? The people who made the TCP/IP stack chose a license that specifically allows a company like Microsoft to take the code and repackage it in their own product, without re-releasing the code. Microsoft did exactly that, so what's the problem?
"Would you rather buy a product made from corn from the Midwest or petroleum from the Middle East?"
Damn, what a sound bite! He's 100% correct, of course, but it's still amazing what one sentence can do to sway the hearts of people. His timing couldn't be better. I'm feeling patriotic already! Too bad I can't digest corn, or I'd have some tonight.
Here in the Dulles Tech Corridore in VA, there are hundreds of out-of-work "IT" people, that barely graduated (or dropped out of) highschool, never got a certification, played all day on the 'net during the web boom, squandered opportunities to go to college, badmouthed everybody that bothered to go to school and get certified, know nothing about anything beyond being the admin of a few FreeBSD machines and are now on perpetual unemployment swearing that they know better than the folks that still have jobs at their old firms (if those firms exist at all).
I know someone like that. He's been out of work for over six months. He worked as a Windows admin for some small company for about five years, never bothered to get certified or learn any other system. He only got certified after he got laid off, but that hasn't helped him any. He refuses to get any other kind of job, instead he just goofs off all day long while unemployment checks come in.
Since when does a machine with Windows pre-loaded come with any support?
Frequently. I tried to talk my mother into buying a Mac (this was before the iMac), but she choose a Dell anyay. I told her Dell would give her better support, but she'd need it more. I was right. At one point, she spent a good TWELVE HOURS on tech support with Dell trying to solve some Windows/Office problem. This was for an $800 computer, so Dell definitely lost money on the sale. The odd thing is that she still gets free support from Dell, but she hasn't needed it in a long time.
I am writing this email to ask you to join twenty of your fellow Representatives in opposing the Copyright Arbitration Royalty Panel's recommendation for Internet radio stations. Rep. Boucher and nineteen others recently sent a letter to CARP expressing their displeasure with the plan. If the CARP recommendation is implemented, it will result in the elimination of hundreds of Internet radio stations because of outrageously high licesing fees. The ironic thing is that traditional radio stations don't have to pay any per-play fees. The CARP plan is targetted specifically at eliminating small and independent online stations.
As an example, one radio station, Radioparadise.com, says that the licensing fees would equate to $9,000/month, which is double the station's income! Not only that, the royalties are retroactive to October 1998. For a popular independent webcaster that has had, say, an average audience of 1,000 listeners (fewer than a single small-market broadcast radio station) for the past three years, the bill for retroactive royalties would be $525,600, or a retroactive royalty rate of 500% to 1000% of their gross revenues to date.
The CARP plan was lobbied by, of course, the Recording Industry Association of America. The RIAA's sole mission is to extort as much money as possile from honest citizens and to shut down any source of independent music. I urge you to take action and protect online radio. Thank you.
HPFS does as well, although under OS/2 the "extended attributes" are limited to 64K bytes. I don't know if the Linux HPFS driver has the same limitation.
Frankly, I wouldn't be disappointed at all if we could get away from the word "free" altogether.
That's why it's really called "Open Source". Some time back, a bunch of people got together and realized that the term "free" was misleading. Anyone who tries to preach the GPL to a layman and uses the word "free" instead of "open" is making a mistake. In fact, it's quite easy to talk about the "freeness" of GPL code without using the word free. For instance, you can say that GPL code can be obtained at no charge and there are no licensing costs with using it. The problem is that the word "free" has several meanings, and therefore it's not a good word to use for people who are sound-byte oriented, like PHBs.
You give up a number of "rights" as part of the "cost" of GNU SurfWriter.
Compared to BSD-style licenses and truly public domain code, yes. But keep in mind that under normal copyright law, you never had the right to distribute the binary in the first place. The GPL gives you the right to distribute it, provided you abide by one condition: the source code goes with it.
For those of you too lazy to read the entire article:
"The chess player had indeed been controlled
by a concealed operator using a clever system of folding partitions to
remain hidden while the automaton's interior was open to view."
Shouldn't your local domain be just "localdomain" (without any top-level domain)? Linux installations typically default to localhost.localdomain, and I think that's the standard.
Slashdot Mirror
If someone uses your open network to commit a crime, you'll also be held liable. Just something to think about.
That flyer was obviously designed by someone with poor graphic design skills.
I call Microsoft every time I get off.
That is not true. Photoshop is designed for graphics professionals, not the average user. That's why Adobe has Photoshop Elements, which is bundled with many scanners and can be purchased for $84.
The truth is, almost all sofware is not priced too expensively for the markets they target. The problem is that users are greedy. They want to have lots of programs, more than they would normally use, and they also want to have programs that are high-end just to have them. No, the real reason why people pirate software is because they can.
Students also get significant discounts on software. I don't know of any major piece of software that costs $500 for a student. For instance, the academic price for Photoshop 7 (full) is $300, which is less than half of the MSRP.
You really should call his office and complain, although it is already 5pm there now.
I'm talking about an across-the-board plan where I don't have to care about the label. I went to SlamJamz records, and they don't provide a list of artists of sample songs for me to try out before I sign up. Not that it matters, from what little I saw I don't think I'll like anything they have to offer.
Of course the cost will be passed along to subscribers. How can that not be clear? Only a moron would willing give up $1/user/month and get nothing out of it. The ISPs don't gain anything from this venture. If anything, they lose because it will encourage more Internet activity and increase the bandwith costs. So if anything, the subscribers will pay more than $1/month.
Frankly, I don't understand why I can't just buy the music directly from the artists, at $1/song.
Broadcasters should not be afraid of PVRs. If anything, I watch more TV, and hence more commercials, than before. So what if I FF through them? Even at 60x speed, I recognize 90% of them because I've seen them already! Because the FF feature requires good eye-hand control, I need to pay extra attention to the TV.
Yes, Linux can play QT movies, but QT is more than just a file format. It's an entire multimedia subsystem with its own API.
How can it be unethical if the license specifically allows for something like that? The people who made the TCP/IP stack chose a license that specifically allows a company like Microsoft to take the code and repackage it in their own product, without re-releasing the code. Microsoft did exactly that, so what's the problem?
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/05/03/11 42220.
Damn, what a sound bite! He's 100% correct, of course, but it's still amazing what one sentence can do to sway the hearts of people. His timing couldn't be better. I'm feeling patriotic already! Too bad I can't digest corn, or I'd have some tonight.
I know someone like that. He's been out of work for over six months. He worked as a Windows admin for some small company for about five years, never bothered to get certified or learn any other system. He only got certified after he got laid off, but that hasn't helped him any. He refuses to get any other kind of job, instead he just goofs off all day long while unemployment checks come in.
Uploading something to the Internet is not in the privacy of your own home. Last I checked, the Internet is not confined to your house.
Boucher is not an asshole. What's wrong with you?
Frequently. I tried to talk my mother into buying a Mac (this was before the iMac), but she choose a Dell anyay. I told her Dell would give her better support, but she'd need it more. I was right. At one point, she spent a good TWELVE HOURS on tech support with Dell trying to solve some Windows/Office problem. This was for an $800 computer, so Dell definitely lost money on the sale. The odd thing is that she still gets free support from Dell, but she hasn't needed it in a long time.
I am writing this email to ask you to join twenty of your fellow Representatives in opposing the Copyright Arbitration Royalty Panel's recommendation for Internet radio stations. Rep. Boucher and nineteen others recently sent a letter to CARP expressing their displeasure with the plan. If the CARP recommendation is implemented, it will result in the elimination of hundreds of Internet radio stations because of outrageously high licesing fees. The ironic thing is that traditional radio stations don't have to pay any per-play fees. The CARP plan is targetted specifically at eliminating small and independent online stations.
As an example, one radio station, Radioparadise.com, says that the licensing fees would equate to $9,000/month, which is double the station's income! Not only that, the royalties are retroactive to October 1998. For a popular independent webcaster that has had, say, an average audience of 1,000 listeners (fewer than a single small-market broadcast radio station) for the past three years, the bill for retroactive royalties would be $525,600, or a retroactive royalty rate of 500% to 1000% of their gross revenues to date.
The CARP plan was lobbied by, of course, the Recording Industry Association of America. The RIAA's sole mission is to extort as much money as possile from honest citizens and to shut down any source of independent music. I urge you to take action and protect online radio. Thank you.
Actually, his name was Zucchini and he invented vegetables. But everything else about your post is correct.
Can you tell me more about this?
HPFS does as well, although under OS/2 the "extended attributes" are limited to 64K bytes. I don't know if the Linux HPFS driver has the same limitation.
That's why it's really called "Open Source". Some time back, a bunch of people got together and realized that the term "free" was misleading. Anyone who tries to preach the GPL to a layman and uses the word "free" instead of "open" is making a mistake. In fact, it's quite easy to talk about the "freeness" of GPL code without using the word free. For instance, you can say that GPL code can be obtained at no charge and there are no licensing costs with using it. The problem is that the word "free" has several meanings, and therefore it's not a good word to use for people who are sound-byte oriented, like PHBs.
Compared to BSD-style licenses and truly public domain code, yes. But keep in mind that under normal copyright law, you never had the right to distribute the binary in the first place. The GPL gives you the right to distribute it, provided you abide by one condition: the source code goes with it.
"The chess player had indeed been controlled by a concealed operator using a clever system of folding partitions to remain hidden while the automaton's interior was open to view."
Shouldn't your local domain be just "localdomain" (without any top-level domain)? Linux installations typically default to localhost.localdomain, and I think that's the standard.
Treason? Oh please, now you're over-reacting.