So that means that this woman shouldn't have to own up to her own actions?
I was driven to attempt suicide, in 8th grade, by... well, it all stemmed from *one* incident, and then it snowballed from there. Eventually, the whole damn school would just relentless pick on me. I tried everything to stop it - ignoring it, fighting back, going through authority, nothing works like that. Granted, some good things came of that, like the fact that I became involved in the OSS community as a way to escape (in fact, thanks to working on OSS in various ways, I'm able to be completely without my prozac ^-^).
Just because someone was 'emotionally weak' is no reason to excuse those who torment them. That's like saying that just because someone couldn't handle being shot at repeatedly that they 'deserved' to die.
1) Give children in third world countries old computers 2) Get children addicted to Oregon Trail 3) Watch children forego sex, and therefore reproduction, in favor of Number Munchers 4) Profit!
are you mathematically challenged? Someone who is 75 now would have been born in 1933. That's between 6 and 9 when the war started (depends on your definition of when it started). And no, most women would not have known how to fix things; that's where the image of the maytag man came from. And I'm not saying that old people are stupid because they're old; I'm saying that their worldviews haven't managed to keep up.
Windows has been around for what, 17 years? And yes, it *was* a drastic change. and your argument holds about 3 drops of water. Honestly, those are things even my father, who is heavily into hobbyist electronics, doesn't know about. don't expect some 75 year old woman who probably was a housewife her whole existence to know about something just because it existed.
No, because making up shit to make someone look bad is called slander/libel, which is perfectly fine to sue over. You wouldn't let someone say "this person is a fuckwit" in the new york times, why would you let them do it online?
Honestly, this doesn't make it 'easier' to do, this makes it more just to people. Regardless of your position on downloading music, you can't sanely argue that it's right that someone pays upwards of 2000 times what the damage is; there is no 'deterrence' feature to these rulings, as it is a civil matter. In fact, the only point of such rulings is retribution and punishment; there is no legal basis, as far as I am aware, for allowing civil rulings to include a deterrence factor.
Neither do they, and it should be kept at a MANAGEABLE level. The thing is, even if a person does have evidence that they only distributed it *once* the RIAA still wants many times the damage they actually perceive.
Why does such a varied field as technology need a framework for it? Accounting, yes, because it is a fairly tight bundle of sticks; but technology, no, not so much.
Accessing and rummaging through it are different animals; For example, if I have a for-sale ebook up on my site, and my hosting company makes a backup, that is fine; however, if an employee decides to READ the document, that is not fine.
Unfortunately for you, since acceptable use for both parties was laid out *in a contract* your point is moot. If the contract says "we will not do x" and they then proceed to do x, they have just broken a legally binding contract.
here's a good analogy for you: If I go to stay in a hotel, does that mean that when I go to the front desk to ask where the pool is they're allowed to search my room? No? Then the "it's their property" thing is null. In fact, since you are PAYING for this service...
Anyway, it's *his* data. Just because it's on their machines does *not* give them a right to the data, especially since he is paying them for the privelege. He's not paying them to search through his DB, he's paying them to provide hardware and support.
Um, your argument makes no sense. Nowadays, unless you are specifically told otherwise, you can usually safely assume that your car will take unleaded. Besides, if the box for the machine says "windows" but the idiot nephew installs ubuntu without telling her, how would she know?
And, if you would actually read my comment, you would notice that, no, i did not say that it was because of apple, ms, or linux; i said it was because of people who know nothing saying "This is awesome! Use it!" and then not being able to help when something invariably comes up.
Yes, because someone who thinks a computer is just the same as any other computer and isn't even told by the person setting it up what's going on. When you don't even know that such things as alternate operating systems EXIST, then no, you're not at fault for someone else just going and installing something without your knowledge.
I really hate to constantly bash ubuntu, but it really should come with all this stuff OUT OF THE BOX. Sabayon comes with all of this stuff ready to go, and that's part of why I like it so much; i don't have to muck about with this shit.
How the hell would she have even known? she's 75, for christ's sake. She thinks a computer is a computer is a computer... It's not her fault that the idiot nephew installed ubuntu without telling her. In all reality, if the nephew actually knew wtf was going on, he could have had it running within the hour. He's the reason why people don't like switching stuff. Example conversation with someone like that: "This is so cool, you should totally use it! It's way better!" "ok." Months later, when a problem is encountered: "Why can't I use $HARDWARE?!" "I don't know..." "Well find out!" "I don't know how." "I thought you said this is better!" "It is!" "Not if I can't do what I want!" "JFGI!"
Slashdot Mirror
So that means that this woman shouldn't have to own up to her own actions?
I was driven to attempt suicide, in 8th grade, by ... well, it all stemmed from *one* incident, and then it snowballed from there. Eventually, the whole damn school would just relentless pick on me. I tried everything to stop it - ignoring it, fighting back, going through authority, nothing works like that.
Granted, some good things came of that, like the fact that I became involved in the OSS community as a way to escape (in fact, thanks to working on OSS in various ways, I'm able to be completely without my prozac ^-^).
Just because someone was 'emotionally weak' is no reason to excuse those who torment them. That's like saying that just because someone couldn't handle being shot at repeatedly that they 'deserved' to die.
First serious, recent attempt my ass. This sounds like Vendetta Online in so many ways... that game kicks ass.
And yes, it runs on linux. Quite nicely, in fact.
1) Give children in third world countries old computers
2) Get children addicted to Oregon Trail
3) Watch children forego sex, and therefore reproduction, in favor of Number Munchers
4) Profit!
It's bullet-proof!
What is it good for?
Absolutely nothing!
are you mathematically challenged? Someone who is 75 now would have been born in 1933. That's between 6 and 9 when the war started (depends on your definition of when it started). And no, most women would not have known how to fix things; that's where the image of the maytag man came from. And I'm not saying that old people are stupid because they're old; I'm saying that their worldviews haven't managed to keep up.
Windows has been around for what, 17 years? And yes, it *was* a drastic change. and your argument holds about 3 drops of water. Honestly, those are things even my father, who is heavily into hobbyist electronics, doesn't know about. don't expect some 75 year old woman who probably was a housewife her whole existence to know about something just because it existed.
No, because making up shit to make someone look bad is called slander/libel, which is perfectly fine to sue over. You wouldn't let someone say "this person is a fuckwit" in the new york times, why would you let them do it online?
I dunno if it's really at that great at club fed... i mean, that spammer went *wacko* there...
What the hell is selling short, anyway?
I think we need a -1 asshole option
Honestly, this doesn't make it 'easier' to do, this makes it more just to people. Regardless of your position on downloading music, you can't sanely argue that it's right that someone pays upwards of 2000 times what the damage is; there is no 'deterrence' feature to these rulings, as it is a civil matter. In fact, the only point of such rulings is retribution and punishment; there is no legal basis, as far as I am aware, for allowing civil rulings to include a deterrence factor.
It depends on what you mean by 'illegally' distributed.
Neither do they, and it should be kept at a MANAGEABLE level. The thing is, even if a person does have evidence that they only distributed it *once* the RIAA still wants many times the damage they actually perceive.
Why does such a varied field as technology need a framework for it? Accounting, yes, because it is a fairly tight bundle of sticks; but technology, no, not so much.
Thanks, your analogy was far better than mine. I suck at car analogies. Might be because I can't drive...
Accessing and rummaging through it are different animals; For example, if I have a for-sale ebook up on my site, and my hosting company makes a backup, that is fine; however, if an employee decides to READ the document, that is not fine.
I never said it was a problem with the software. Read again, bub.
that's really like saying that it's acceptable for a landlord to put a surveillance camera in the bedroom then whack off to the footage.
Unfortunately for you, since acceptable use for both parties was laid out *in a contract* your point is moot. If the contract says "we will not do x" and they then proceed to do x, they have just broken a legally binding contract.
here's a good analogy for you:
If I go to stay in a hotel, does that mean that when I go to the front desk to ask where the pool is they're allowed to search my room? No? Then the "it's their property" thing is null. In fact, since you are PAYING for this service...
Anyway, it's *his* data. Just because it's on their machines does *not* give them a right to the data, especially since he is paying them for the privelege. He's not paying them to search through his DB, he's paying them to provide hardware and support.
Don't say it, man. Seriously, i'm not even through here, and I think it just got godwinned. ffs.
And how many people outside of /. really know that such a thing as linux exists? Not many.
Also, most people hit the button and walk away from. Hell, I don't even watch it boot, and I'm on here nearly 12 hours a day!
Um, your argument makes no sense. Nowadays, unless you are specifically told otherwise, you can usually safely assume that your car will take unleaded. Besides, if the box for the machine says "windows" but the idiot nephew installs ubuntu without telling her, how would she know?
And, if you would actually read my comment, you would notice that, no, i did not say that it was because of apple, ms, or linux; i said it was because of people who know nothing saying "This is awesome! Use it!" and then not being able to help when something invariably comes up.
Yes, because someone who thinks a computer is just the same as any other computer and isn't even told by the person setting it up what's going on. When you don't even know that such things as alternate operating systems EXIST, then no, you're not at fault for someone else just going and installing something without your knowledge.
I see you have slashdotter installed in firefox.
I really hate to constantly bash ubuntu, but it really should come with all this stuff OUT OF THE BOX. Sabayon comes with all of this stuff ready to go, and that's part of why I like it so much; i don't have to muck about with this shit.
Ooh! first of all, ssh -x allows per program running. Second of all, is RA in windows even encrypted?
Plus, Great Aunt Mildred should be told "don't fuck about".
How the hell would she have even known? she's 75, for christ's sake. She thinks a computer is a computer is a computer... It's not her fault that the idiot nephew installed ubuntu without telling her. In all reality, if the nephew actually knew wtf was going on, he could have had it running within the hour. He's the reason why people don't like switching stuff. Example conversation with someone like that:
"This is so cool, you should totally use it! It's way better!"
"ok."
Months later, when a problem is encountered:
"Why can't I use $HARDWARE?!"
"I don't know..."
"Well find out!"
"I don't know how."
"I thought you said this is better!"
"It is!"
"Not if I can't do what I want!"
"JFGI!"