EVERY scripture / bible / "holy book" teaches the same thing: "Respect ALL THINGS."
That's simply not true. The Bible, Koran and Torah are all very vocal about things which should be condemned and not respected at all.
I imagine the same is true for many other religious texts. It's pretty difficult to develop a substantial following or moral code by saying "everything is worthy of respect." Religions mainly function by what they condemn.
How is one citizen going to attack a huge multinational corporation on their peasant's salary(compared to the execs and lawyers of Giantcorp)? How do citizens have any chance to succeed when the government just takes from them and gives it to the already-rich right and left? When the government just takes the highest bribes and does what they say?
Seriously, did you not understand that that was the point of my post? Did you miss the obvious subtext and sarcasm?
I guess thats the price you pay when you have perhaps the greatest electronics brand name recognition in history. It doesn't help when you're always in the news for your record profits either. Of course, one could argue that those things may also have positive aspects for a corporation....
But nobody was writing front-page articles about Foxconn when Dell or HP or whoever were the top of the industry, and Apple was considered to be irrelevant.
Yeah, land of the free, blah blah blah. The world is not a magical Ayn Randian fantasy land.
Yes. That was my point. That people in America, who believe in this Randian fantasy land, demonize the Chinese government for failing their citizens up, while simultaneously screaming for less government intervention.
More pressure should be placed on the Chinese government, since it is ultimately their responsibility to improve the lives of their citizens.
While it's true that the Chinese government needs to take its share of responsibility, don't the citizens of China also have responsibility in improving their lives?
Imagine if the same were said about America. The American government should be responsible for improving the lives of citizens? In "the land of the free," shouldn't that responsibility lie in the hands of the citizens themselves, while government should just get out of the way?
I'm pretty sure there would be an outcry about how the government shouldn't be managing people's lives.
So he introduced a product that had marginal battery life, low capacity for a hard drive system, and only supported the Mac because it was "reserved for the superior customer experience". The original iPod sucked, too, and much of that was available technology of the time. Don't forget, additionally, that the iPod was developed by an outside company and purchased by Apple. Apple's dominance of mp3 was due to money, being a big name in an emerging market, and a commitment to incremental improvement. Apple was the IBM of mp3, it succeeded because of who it was, not the superiority of its product. That came later.
Wow, that's almost 100% incorrect, yet you get modded up. What the fuck?
No it's not. It's literally the very definition of copyright. It is a limited time monopoly so that after such time passes society reaps the *entire* benefit of it being freely available for use by anyone however they see fit.
Huh? Where did I say it shouldn't be time limited. What I was responding to was your argument that the money shouldn't be flowing to the creator/owner, but rather some undefined "somebody else" for the benefit of society.
My argument is that without copyright law, that "somebody else" who is benefiting is likely to be shady actors like Megaupload, etc. So, how does that benefit society and the arts?
I would fully agree that RIAA/MPAA are impoverishing society by their very existence yes.
When did I mention them? You are aware that one can copyright works without being involved in the RIAA/MPAA cartels, right?
Most people who strongly advocate against allowing illegals into the country and/or allowing them to become legal would be perfectly happy with laws that make it easier/cheaper for people to legally enter the country.
Yes there is a correlation to one being a poor, unskilled and illegal laborer in the USA and being "brown". The republicans would love to toss all of the former group out, regardless of the amount of pigmentation in their skin.
Nonsense. The Republican base needs those people to exploit. The last thing they want is an intelligent and skilled population, that would mean the end of their party.
Wanting to control our population numbers is NOT RACIST.
The racist part comes in where with white skin who speak English are favored over other immigrants. If you don't think that happens, then you are delusional.
There are also other issues apart from racism. America was founded by violence. Who's to say that certain people are able to claim a certain geographic area, but not others? If a stronger military force were to conquer the USA, would you be OK with that?
Perhaps the greater good of culture and society...which is what copyright is supposed to be supporting?
Jesus Fucking Christ, this is a retarded argument.
Generally speaking, copyright does support the greater good of culture and society. The money that's not going to the artist at least goes to a publisher who was willing to support the artist at some point.
If it's just a free-for-all, then who does that money go to? Even shadier individuals and the viagra/online dating/porn/gambling scumbags that enable them.
That diversion of money does not enrich culture and society, it impoverishes it.
Yes, but they don't tend to deliberately freeze the finances to ensure the corporation can't pay its bills so that the company's key business assets get repossessed. In this instance, they did (copied the drives so that the servers are no longer considered evidence, then froze the finances so MegaUpload can't pay its hosting bill, then send a letter to the hosting companies informing them that the government has no further need of the servers so they may be disposed of according to the company's non-payment policy).
How is that any different to when the government seizes a drug dealer's property and freezes their bank accounts?
Uh Amazon doesn't push impulse buys? Are those emails I get every other day figments of my imagination, or does the fact that they scientifically determine what I'm most likely to impulse buy somehow make them "better"?
I don't believe anybody claimed that Amazon doesn't push impulse buys, rather that you can just buy what you want without a lot of hassle.
Right, that's exactly how you should cover Windows Phone news on Slashdot. Link one posting, by a blogger well known for poorly substantiated rants against Elop's Nokia. Link it twice as if referring to two sources.
Slashdot Mirror
EVERY scripture / bible / "holy book" teaches the same thing: "Respect ALL THINGS."
That's simply not true. The Bible, Koran and Torah are all very vocal about things which should be condemned and not respected at all.
I imagine the same is true for many other religious texts. It's pretty difficult to develop a substantial following or moral code by saying "everything is worthy of respect." Religions mainly function by what they condemn.
So to what degree should we boycott Kevin Bacon?
I oppose any Bacon boycotts on the grounds of deliciousness.
Islam is a tolerant, peaceful religion, we're told.
Who told you that??
How is one citizen going to attack a huge multinational corporation on their peasant's salary(compared to the execs and lawyers of Giantcorp)? How do citizens have any chance to succeed when the government just takes from them and gives it to the already-rich right and left? When the government just takes the highest bribes and does what they say?
Seriously, did you not understand that that was the point of my post? Did you miss the obvious subtext and sarcasm?
I guess thats the price you pay when you have perhaps the greatest electronics brand name recognition in history. It doesn't help when you're always in the news for your record profits either. Of course, one could argue that those things may also have positive aspects for a corporation....
But nobody was writing front-page articles about Foxconn when Dell or HP or whoever were the top of the industry, and Apple was considered to be irrelevant.
I wonder why?
Yeah, land of the free, blah blah blah. The world is not a magical Ayn Randian fantasy land.
Yes. That was my point. That people in America, who believe in this Randian fantasy land, demonize the Chinese government for failing their citizens up, while simultaneously screaming for less government intervention.
Did you entirely miss my fairly obvious subtext?
More pressure should be placed on the Chinese government, since it is ultimately their responsibility to improve the lives of their citizens.
While it's true that the Chinese government needs to take its share of responsibility, don't the citizens of China also have responsibility in improving their lives?
Imagine if the same were said about America. The American government should be responsible for improving the lives of citizens? In "the land of the free," shouldn't that responsibility lie in the hands of the citizens themselves, while government should just get out of the way?
I'm pretty sure there would be an outcry about how the government shouldn't be managing people's lives.
So he introduced a product that had marginal battery life, low capacity for a hard drive system, and only supported the Mac because it was "reserved for the superior customer experience". The original iPod sucked, too, and much of that was available technology of the time. Don't forget, additionally, that the iPod was developed by an outside company and purchased by Apple. Apple's dominance of mp3 was due to money, being a big name in an emerging market, and a commitment to incremental improvement. Apple was the IBM of mp3, it succeeded because of who it was, not the superiority of its product. That came later.
Wow, that's almost 100% incorrect, yet you get modded up. What the fuck?
The idea of copyright is reasonable. What we have for copyright today is a perversion of what it is supposed to be.
No fucking shit. So, why not make that argument, rather than the trollish rubbish you first advanced?
No it's not. It's literally the very definition of copyright. It is a limited time monopoly so that after such time passes society reaps the *entire* benefit of it being freely available for use by anyone however they see fit.
Huh? Where did I say it shouldn't be time limited. What I was responding to was your argument that the money shouldn't be flowing to the creator/owner, but rather some undefined "somebody else" for the benefit of society.
My argument is that without copyright law, that "somebody else" who is benefiting is likely to be shady actors like Megaupload, etc. So, how does that benefit society and the arts?
I would fully agree that RIAA/MPAA are impoverishing society by their very existence yes.
When did I mention them? You are aware that one can copyright works without being involved in the RIAA/MPAA cartels, right?
Most people who strongly advocate against allowing illegals into the country and/or allowing them to become legal would be perfectly happy with laws that make it easier/cheaper for people to legally enter the country.
[citation needed]
Yes there is a correlation to one being a poor, unskilled and illegal laborer in the USA and being "brown". The republicans would love to toss all of the former group out, regardless of the amount of pigmentation in their skin.
Nonsense. The Republican base needs those people to exploit. The last thing they want is an intelligent and skilled population, that would mean the end of their party.
Wanting to control our population numbers is NOT RACIST.
The racist part comes in where with white skin who speak English are favored over other immigrants. If you don't think that happens, then you are delusional.
There are also other issues apart from racism. America was founded by violence. Who's to say that certain people are able to claim a certain geographic area, but not others? If a stronger military force were to conquer the USA, would you be OK with that?
Very few people have said "screw it, download everything".
You must have a strange definition of "very few" when it comes to Slashdot. That's pretty much the majority position.
Perhaps the greater good of culture and society...which is what copyright is supposed to be supporting?
Jesus Fucking Christ, this is a retarded argument.
Generally speaking, copyright does support the greater good of culture and society. The money that's not going to the artist at least goes to a publisher who was willing to support the artist at some point.
If it's just a free-for-all, then who does that money go to? Even shadier individuals and the viagra/online dating/porn/gambling scumbags that enable them.
That diversion of money does not enrich culture and society, it impoverishes it.
The government seizes the property too, so in the event they're found innocent the suspected drug dealer can simply carry on as they were.
Soooo... how is that any different to what's happening with MegaUpload?
Any way you cut it, house brands for stores are bad news for consumers. Anti-competitive one might say.
How is it bad news for customers? As your post demonstrates, it results in better quality products for lower prices.
Perhaps you mean it's bad news for the suppliers? (Although I don't really see what the news has to do with it.)
Yes, but they don't tend to deliberately freeze the finances to ensure the corporation can't pay its bills so that the company's key business assets get repossessed. In this instance, they did (copied the drives so that the servers are no longer considered evidence, then froze the finances so MegaUpload can't pay its hosting bill, then send a letter to the hosting companies informing them that the government has no further need of the servers so they may be disposed of according to the company's non-payment policy).
How is that any different to when the government seizes a drug dealer's property and freezes their bank accounts?
Uh Amazon doesn't push impulse buys? Are those emails I get every other day figments of my imagination, or does the fact that they scientifically determine what I'm most likely to impulse buy somehow make them "better"?
I don't believe anybody claimed that Amazon doesn't push impulse buys, rather that you can just buy what you want without a lot of hassle.
Right, that's exactly how you should cover Windows Phone news on Slashdot. Link one posting, by a blogger well known for poorly substantiated rants against Elop's Nokia. Link it twice as if referring to two sources.
Isn't that how everything is covered on Slashdot?
Neither Apple or Google offer business class email/calendaring services.
Oh, so that explains why so many businesses are switching to Google Apps for email and calendar services!
It might not be too late for their N9 "Qt phone" series yet.
More like "Windows Mobile 6.5 Classic," given the incompetence that's currently on display.
Bah. I tried the MultiBen phone. It was full of crap - buggy as all get out. Also it kept changing my name to "Ben".
Honestly, it's a superior name. You should have just gone with it.
But do other corporations get treated in the same way? When they are sued, do they get shut down before the verdict?
Yes. Injunctions are frequently issued to prohibit the accused company from engaging in the accused act until the case is resolved.
while they may have an argument about the use creating a false impression that NBC the company endorses Romney that is NOT a copyright issue.
Actually it is. "Moral Rights" are a part of copyright law via international convention. See here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_rights_(copyright_law)#Moral_rights_in_the_United_States
There's definitely a good chance that Romney's use of Brokaw's mage could be a violation of Brokaw's Moral Rights.