Your second link amusingly proves the stupid Slashdot article wrong:
Kitigawa has shown fairly conclusively with dummies that metal about the head does not increase the likelihood of being hit (unless it projects far above the head, increasing the person's height).
I disagree. I think that the music companies through the RIAA want to use DRM to eventually enforce a licensing model of music sales where they can charge you every time you listen to a song, rewriting copyright law in the process. DRM is the only way to do that. If this is the case, they'd use piracy and reduction of sales as a smokescreen just to push DRM.
I don't think they care why you aren't buying their music, because people who boycott CDs are a minority. Sales might be down, but ultimately they just want to make sure that they can squeeze more money from the market, which they'll do by controlling their product more closely. And don't tell me they already license their music to me when I buy a CD; functionally, once I purchase a CD I can do whatever I want with the music, which the RIAA wants to prevent. If they can't charge per-listen then they're losing money.
In my day we didn't even have glasses, just rocks that we held in front of our eyes. We couldn't see any better, but at least nothing was blurry because all we could see were these big rocks, and we didn't have to worry about the long-term effects of a couple of newfangled magnifying lenses focusing the sun's rays and cooking our retinas. Glasses? Thanks, but no thanks, I'll stick with my rocks. At least I know they won't make me go blind someday.
The IAU issued a press release stating that the definition would be delayed until next year while they change to the metric system. They also noted that when it is finally released, it will be the most awesome multiplayer online definition of a planet that the world has ever seen.
The IAU has offered its Division III-Planetary Systems Sciences group $500,000 in the form of a promissory note if the definition sees commercial release by December 31, 2006.
And it seems that that is when the discussions on debian-flamware started
flamware (flâm'wâr) adj. 1. Copyrighted software that is available free of charge with the condition that users harshly criticize each other and their respective mothers.
You're right, this phrase is corporate-speak for 'taking away consumer rights' in the same way that 'Document Retention Policy' outlines how to destroy sensitive documents. If you look at what 'Rights Management' means in the stock photo world, some photos you purchase an unlimited license to do with what you want (though the pricing is tiered based on the resolution of the file), but the lion's share of good photos are very limited in what you can do with them. I therefore agree with your prediction that we'll be paying for licenses to use music in limited ways. That way they can 'tier' access, like less money for shorter periods. The difference between the music model and the stock photo world is that they use laws to prevent you from breaking your license instead of using software programs, yet they still seem to make money.
I agreed with you right up till the end, when I got confused: what does me being a liberal have to do with anything you just said? If anything, I'd think that you, as a conservative, would OPPOSE putting up a bunch of intrusive, expensive, big-government cameras. See, I'm a small-government liberal: I think that cutting taxes is fine as long as our laws are actually enforced (which they're currently not, but that's another post). But spending money on something frivolous like PEACEFUL (and ultimately useless) border patrol is just a waste of money. It's not a law-and-order issue even: it's purely political posturing.
That's why I oppose these cameras (and so should all fiscal conservatives), but I guess your world is a little too black and white for anything but your epithets.
I don't mean to intrude on your awesome flame war, but:
I hold the citizens of democratically elected governments responsible for their governments actions, no matter what race they are.
I have to say, this is the dumbest thing I've heard yet today. You can hold a nation collectively responsible for its leaders, but not its citizens. I've done and continue to do everything I'm allowed to do in my democracy to prevent what my government is doing wrong, short of revolution. I voted against Bush twice now. So how exactly does that make me responsible for his actions? Presumably because I have a choice in the matter. Should I become a Canadian citizen to absolve myself, or is that running away from my responsiblity? America, love it or leave it?
By your logic, even citizens of totalitarian countries are responsible for their leaders' actions, since they do not 'choose' to stage a revolution and overthrow their leaders, or sneak out and become citizens of another country. They are not responsible for its leaders. If that were the case, then you would convict countries of war crimes, not individual leaders. Why should a democracy be held to different standards? Most people don't even vote. Some of them CAN'T vote (i.e. convicted felons in Florida). So are they still responsible?
I'm just not a SNAG enough to feel responsible for things outside my control, and that's the key concept here: as an individual, you cannot be held responsible for things outside your control. Otherwise you could be thrown in prison because your parents were criminals, or be forced to pay their debts when they die.
Bush is the war criminal, not me. I feel bad about how he's screwed up the world, but not guilty. I didn't vote for him. I write my congresscritters about impeaching him, but I'm not allowed to vote on that directly. I could run for office, but I'm not a millionaire and wouldn't win. If you want to feel guilty, go ahead. Just don't drag the rest of us into your own private guilt trip.
It's not like the PCs weren't made in China when the division was owned by IBM.
It's not like the Federal Building in Oklahoma wasn't bombed by an American citizen, either. Gotta love the irrational nationalism, especially in the face of corporate greed. Though it's my suspicion that the US government might use the cover of national security as convenient leverage over the Chinese in other areas.
You're right, we should talk about how governments are gathering too much power, and how this concentration of power is a bad thing. Just don't resort to hyperbole because it undercuts your argument. Godwin's Law implies that this is the point where rational debate loses out to emotion.
Incidentally, posting anonymously undercuts your argument as well. Don't you believe in what you're saying? Or are you afraid that you'll get disappeared for saying it?
Comparing any of our current major governments to Soviet Russia sounds an awful lot like a new version of Godwin's Law. Can we call this one "Fapestniegd's Corollary"? It would state that as an online discussion (about government) grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Soviet Russia or 1984 approaches one.
Spun off the drive division--at 7200 rpm! Right before they defenestrated their primary OS--chucked out the Windows! Seriously, though, I'm pretty sure every division of 3M sticks to Post-It Notes. Badump-tss!
I'm sure that 3 hours is probably closer to normal. I had hardware issues, and problems figuring out Debian package lists. Since I'd never really done a Linux install before it took a while to research my problems and shop the forums for solutions. To reference my original post, I'm not willing to spend all that time on somebody else's hardware issues. I'm glad your install was trouble-free, though.
Above all, we need to make it a criminal offence for a company to attempt to buy laws.
What we need is to create a non-profit organization to raise money to hire some Washington insider lobbyists to get this law passed, before our law makes such behavior illegal.
No. I didn't read the EULA. Most people don't. Even if they did, most people's first thought wouldn't be to ask the supplier for a refund anyway. Just because people have an option doesn't mean it's the easiest one. Besides, she'd bought the laptop used on eBay. At that point, do you really believe that the supplier is going to give her a refund for Windows XP? Not without a really major hassle. So in this case, Windows was actually free, since it came on a used laptop that she would have paid the same amount for even if Linux were pre-installed.
Look, I prefer Linux. You can take all of your expert arguments and shove them up your righteous ass, because I'm already a convert. I'm just not an activist. You'll have to get used to Linux users who aren't experts or evangelists if you want to continue making converts. And my friend would be a Linux user if I were confident that I could support her system, which I am not. Is that my fault? Not unless you're into forcing people to do things that they don't want to do, which last I checked kind of flies in the face of Open Source and Linux philosophies. Anonymous jerk.
Dual-boot is a good idea. I did give her a live cd, too. That's as far as I'm willing to mess with other people's computers, though.
I hadn't heard that the next version of Flash will work on Linux, too. That's pretty cool. I hope they work out the dynamic font problems, too. But what you're saying about movies is one of my pet peeves. In my limited experience, watching Windows Media or Quicktime files is not "100 times easier under linux than windows." Also, it drives me nuts when people tell me to "add lines to/etc/apt/sources.list, and apt-get install a few packages." Why can't I download an installer that will do that crap for me? It's really not that easy to 1) know that there is a better movie player out there and 2) know where to get that movie player and 3) know how to apt-do-anything. But like I said before, I'm not a Linux expert, just an interested user. If it's not already in Synaptic, I don't know how to get it.
I agree that there are plenty of reasons to switch. And I totally agree about doing it right. That's exactly why we couldn't help her. It took me about a month to really get things right on my Linux laptop. That's not the kind of time I want to spend on somebody else's. That said, I do like Linux enough to install it on my wife's computer. Other than the few Flash and Quicktime movies she can't watch (and being careful with Office docs) she doesn't mind it too much. But the difference is, I use that computer too, so I don't mind being in charge of it. When it comes right down to it, I just don't have time to be an evangelist for everyone. I think that's WAY too much to expect from an average Linux user.
What's not honest about my personal experience? Sure, Linux is free, but so was the version of Windows that came with her laptop. Sure, Microsoft is evil, but then again so are a lot of corporations I'm forced to live with. Sure, things crash on Windows, but things go wrong with Linux too. I agree about not having to restart as often, but come on, it's not a server it's a laptop. The thing is going to get restarted frequently anyway. The viruses and spyware point is a good one, but it doesn't outweigh the responsibility I'd be taking on for a friend's computer problems. And you're not being honest about Flash, either. What's the latest version of Flash for Linux? Still 6? And there's only one Linux distro that lets you play most movies out of the box that I've heard of. Otherwise, it's off to the Hungarian servers for some codecs.
Your post kind of proves my point: I never claimed to be a Linux expert, just a geek. You clearly are a Linux expert, one who would be willing to provide customer support for my friend. If you had not posted anonymously, I could have given her your email address and you could have helped her switch, since you feel so bad for her.
Slashdot Mirror
I disagree. I think that the music companies through the RIAA want to use DRM to eventually enforce a licensing model of music sales where they can charge you every time you listen to a song, rewriting copyright law in the process. DRM is the only way to do that. If this is the case, they'd use piracy and reduction of sales as a smokescreen just to push DRM.
I don't think they care why you aren't buying their music, because people who boycott CDs are a minority. Sales might be down, but ultimately they just want to make sure that they can squeeze more money from the market, which they'll do by controlling their product more closely. And don't tell me they already license their music to me when I buy a CD; functionally, once I purchase a CD I can do whatever I want with the music, which the RIAA wants to prevent. If they can't charge per-listen then they're losing money.
In my day we didn't even have glasses, just rocks that we held in front of our eyes. We couldn't see any better, but at least nothing was blurry because all we could see were these big rocks, and we didn't have to worry about the long-term effects of a couple of newfangled magnifying lenses focusing the sun's rays and cooking our retinas. Glasses? Thanks, but no thanks, I'll stick with my rocks. At least I know they won't make me go blind someday.
The IAU issued a press release stating that the definition would be delayed until next year while they change to the metric system. They also noted that when it is finally released, it will be the most awesome multiplayer online definition of a planet that the world has ever seen.
The IAU has offered its Division III-Planetary Systems Sciences group $500,000 in the form of a promissory note if the definition sees commercial release by December 31, 2006.
It's got a nice Speak-n-Spell color scheme, though.
Which is why decreasing the number of pirates increases global temperatures. Hoist those albedo-increasing sails, mateys!
You're right, this phrase is corporate-speak for 'taking away consumer rights' in the same way that 'Document Retention Policy' outlines how to destroy sensitive documents. If you look at what 'Rights Management' means in the stock photo world, some photos you purchase an unlimited license to do with what you want (though the pricing is tiered based on the resolution of the file), but the lion's share of good photos are very limited in what you can do with them. I therefore agree with your prediction that we'll be paying for licenses to use music in limited ways. That way they can 'tier' access, like less money for shorter periods. The difference between the music model and the stock photo world is that they use laws to prevent you from breaking your license instead of using software programs, yet they still seem to make money.
I agreed with you right up till the end, when I got confused: what does me being a liberal have to do with anything you just said? If anything, I'd think that you, as a conservative, would OPPOSE putting up a bunch of intrusive, expensive, big-government cameras. See, I'm a small-government liberal: I think that cutting taxes is fine as long as our laws are actually enforced (which they're currently not, but that's another post). But spending money on something frivolous like PEACEFUL (and ultimately useless) border patrol is just a waste of money. It's not a law-and-order issue even: it's purely political posturing.
That's why I oppose these cameras (and so should all fiscal conservatives), but I guess your world is a little too black and white for anything but your epithets.
God you conservatives make me sick.
Because they're totally gonna return it later.
I don't mean to intrude on your awesome flame war, but:
I hold the citizens of democratically elected governments responsible for their governments actions, no matter what race they are.
I have to say, this is the dumbest thing I've heard yet today. You can hold a nation collectively responsible for its leaders, but not its citizens. I've done and continue to do everything I'm allowed to do in my democracy to prevent what my government is doing wrong, short of revolution. I voted against Bush twice now. So how exactly does that make me responsible for his actions? Presumably because I have a choice in the matter. Should I become a Canadian citizen to absolve myself, or is that running away from my responsiblity? America, love it or leave it?
By your logic, even citizens of totalitarian countries are responsible for their leaders' actions, since they do not 'choose' to stage a revolution and overthrow their leaders, or sneak out and become citizens of another country. They are not responsible for its leaders. If that were the case, then you would convict countries of war crimes, not individual leaders. Why should a democracy be held to different standards? Most people don't even vote. Some of them CAN'T vote (i.e. convicted felons in Florida). So are they still responsible?
I'm just not a SNAG enough to feel responsible for things outside my control, and that's the key concept here: as an individual, you cannot be held responsible for things outside your control. Otherwise you could be thrown in prison because your parents were criminals, or be forced to pay their debts when they die.
Bush is the war criminal, not me. I feel bad about how he's screwed up the world, but not guilty. I didn't vote for him. I write my congresscritters about impeaching him, but I'm not allowed to vote on that directly. I could run for office, but I'm not a millionaire and wouldn't win. If you want to feel guilty, go ahead. Just don't drag the rest of us into your own private guilt trip.
It's not like the PCs weren't made in China when the division was owned by IBM.
It's not like the Federal Building in Oklahoma wasn't bombed by an American citizen, either. Gotta love the irrational nationalism, especially in the face of corporate greed. Though it's my suspicion that the US government might use the cover of national security as convenient leverage over the Chinese in other areas.
I hope this is a precendent: maybe the patent system, broken as it is, will slowly get fixed over time by constant vigilant review of bogus patents.
Now we just need them to quit issuing the crappy ones in the first place.
f) Profit!
You're right, we should talk about how governments are gathering too much power, and how this concentration of power is a bad thing. Just don't resort to hyperbole because it undercuts your argument. Godwin's Law implies that this is the point where rational debate loses out to emotion.
Incidentally, posting anonymously undercuts your argument as well. Don't you believe in what you're saying? Or are you afraid that you'll get disappeared for saying it?
Comparing any of our current major governments to Soviet Russia sounds an awful lot like a new version of Godwin's Law. Can we call this one "Fapestniegd's Corollary"? It would state that as an online discussion (about government) grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Soviet Russia or 1984 approaches one.
That's like, 6 years in Internet Time.
Spun off the drive division--at 7200 rpm! Right before they defenestrated their primary OS--chucked out the Windows! Seriously, though, I'm pretty sure every division of 3M sticks to Post-It Notes. Badump-tss!
Looks like he's serving his web page from his freakin' 3g phone.
I'm sure that 3 hours is probably closer to normal. I had hardware issues, and problems figuring out Debian package lists. Since I'd never really done a Linux install before it took a while to research my problems and shop the forums for solutions. To reference my original post, I'm not willing to spend all that time on somebody else's hardware issues. I'm glad your install was trouble-free, though.
Above all, we need to make it a criminal offence for a company to attempt to buy laws.
What we need is to create a non-profit organization to raise money to hire some Washington insider lobbyists to get this law passed, before our law makes such behavior illegal.
No. I didn't read the EULA. Most people don't. Even if they did, most people's first thought wouldn't be to ask the supplier for a refund anyway. Just because people have an option doesn't mean it's the easiest one. Besides, she'd bought the laptop used on eBay. At that point, do you really believe that the supplier is going to give her a refund for Windows XP? Not without a really major hassle. So in this case, Windows was actually free, since it came on a used laptop that she would have paid the same amount for even if Linux were pre-installed.
Look, I prefer Linux. You can take all of your expert arguments and shove them up your righteous ass, because I'm already a convert. I'm just not an activist. You'll have to get used to Linux users who aren't experts or evangelists if you want to continue making converts. And my friend would be a Linux user if I were confident that I could support her system, which I am not. Is that my fault? Not unless you're into forcing people to do things that they don't want to do, which last I checked kind of flies in the face of Open Source and Linux philosophies. Anonymous jerk.
Dual-boot is a good idea. I did give her a live cd, too. That's as far as I'm willing to mess with other people's computers, though.
/etc/apt/sources.list, and apt-get install a few packages." Why can't I download an installer that will do that crap for me? It's really not that easy to 1) know that there is a better movie player out there and 2) know where to get that movie player and 3) know how to apt-do-anything. But like I said before, I'm not a Linux expert, just an interested user. If it's not already in Synaptic, I don't know how to get it.
I hadn't heard that the next version of Flash will work on Linux, too. That's pretty cool. I hope they work out the dynamic font problems, too. But what you're saying about movies is one of my pet peeves. In my limited experience, watching Windows Media or Quicktime files is not "100 times easier under linux than windows." Also, it drives me nuts when people tell me to "add lines to
I agree that there are plenty of reasons to switch. And I totally agree about doing it right. That's exactly why we couldn't help her. It took me about a month to really get things right on my Linux laptop. That's not the kind of time I want to spend on somebody else's. That said, I do like Linux enough to install it on my wife's computer. Other than the few Flash and Quicktime movies she can't watch (and being careful with Office docs) she doesn't mind it too much. But the difference is, I use that computer too, so I don't mind being in charge of it. When it comes right down to it, I just don't have time to be an evangelist for everyone. I think that's WAY too much to expect from an average Linux user.
What's not honest about my personal experience? Sure, Linux is free, but so was the version of Windows that came with her laptop. Sure, Microsoft is evil, but then again so are a lot of corporations I'm forced to live with. Sure, things crash on Windows, but things go wrong with Linux too. I agree about not having to restart as often, but come on, it's not a server it's a laptop. The thing is going to get restarted frequently anyway. The viruses and spyware point is a good one, but it doesn't outweigh the responsibility I'd be taking on for a friend's computer problems. And you're not being honest about Flash, either. What's the latest version of Flash for Linux? Still 6? And there's only one Linux distro that lets you play most movies out of the box that I've heard of. Otherwise, it's off to the Hungarian servers for some codecs.
Your post kind of proves my point: I never claimed to be a Linux expert, just a geek. You clearly are a Linux expert, one who would be willing to provide customer support for my friend. If you had not posted anonymously, I could have given her your email address and you could have helped her switch, since you feel so bad for her.