You do in fact claim that sales are revenue that belongs to the seller - regardless of whether or not the buyer has agreed to pay the terms. That is precisely what you are saying when you claim that the pirated copies are equal in dollar value to the same number of sales in the unit price demanded by the manufacturer.
Again, you are putting words into my mouth. Go back and read my actual statements.
I give you that the piracy may even be illegal (although it is my understanding that in China it is not, since they do not subscribe to US copyright law
To enter the WTO, China had and did adopt similar copyright laws. The problem is that China is not enforcing their own laws.
...but that doesn't justify your math, here. It's just wrong. You have no reasonable estimate of how many copies of any particular item may be sold in China at $20 - only estimates of how many copies are selling at $1 or $2.
Frankly, it is not unreasonable to assume that someone out of the billion+ people living in China would buy a $10 CD if piracy was stamped out. Further, it is not unreasonable to assume that even a low percentage of those billion+ people living in China would buy a $10 CD if piracy was stamped out. Even if only 1% of the population bought a CD every month, that would mean 10,000,000+ copies sold a month, based on their enormous population. That is hardly chump change and definitely better than selling nothing.
...if I were one of the mafiosos whose business it was to make sure that copies of work sold in China paid my company instead of some pirate, one of the first things I'd be looking at would be "how cheaply can I sell this and still turn a profit?" Of course, that is a pragmatic, capitalist POV which discounts any desire to take something that I can't legitimately earn. This is how we can know that the principles involved are simply grifters - gouging the market to line their own pockets, and screw the consumer - why do they have to consider the buyer if they can dictate the price by law? Who will care that the content of the CD isn't worth $10, let alone $20?
First off, you can't sell goods to one market at one price while selling it to a rich market at a higher price. That is called dumping, and it is illegal, not to mention repugnant and plain stupid. Why does China get to pay less for a CD than I do here in the US. We frickin made the CD in the first place.
Let's say record companies actually did what you propose. Then, nothing stops other companies like Wal-Mart from buying those CDs in China and selling them in America. So much for your little plan.
You still haven't explained how the earnings of these companies aren't "legitimate". For example, Oracle creates software. That is their software. They have the right to sell it at any price they want, whether you "need" it or not. They legitimately created it and legitimately own it. If you want a copy, then you pay. If you don't want a copy, then don't pay. It is that frickin easy.
If you think the content of a music CD isn't worth $10, then don't frickin buy it. You have plenty of chance to hear it on the radio or listen to it in the store before buying.
Me: I might add that if piracy were not an issue, then companies would not have to charge as much for software, CDs, and DVDs. Because of this problem, all of us who actually follow the law then pay for this problem.
You: This is a purely specious and fallacious argument. It sounds good, but if you examine the math (as above) and think about it for a moment, it is obvious bunk. The entertainment conglomerates would cut their own throats to get legislation giving them a stronger lock on the market - they've been at this for decades - they know damned well that appearing to take a loss from these "theives" is critically important to their arguments.
From what I can see, women first objectify themselves long before men come into the picture. Girls are now fighting to wear makeup and skimpy outfits in elementary school, long before their parents or the boys take notice. It's all in competition with the other girls to outdo each other. Over time, that competition with the other girls, and eventually women, evolves to an advanced level where things like anorexia come into play.
Historically, skinny wasn't a "look" until the common people had enough food to become fat. Even now, poor societies picture overweight women as more attractive than thin girls who can't afford enough to eat. As soon as everyone in our "rich" society was fat, the rich celebrities all became skinny to look different. Now thin is in and people are literally dying to become skinny.
As far as I'm concerned, women can blame themselves just as much as men for their own problems. It's their own vanity to appear like the wealthy celebrities that are doing them in. Take some frickin' responsibility for your own life, please.
I tend to agree, men and women are equally stereotyped in video games, however to a lot of feminists find men are positively stereotyped (if such a thing exists), and women are negatively stereotyped.
I don't see that. Both sexes are displayed as the sexual ideal. If feminists see a female character with big boobs, a tight ass, and the perfect figure as a negative stereotype, while simultaneously seeing a male character with a muscular chest and bulging biceps as a positive stereotype, then feminists have other issues than merely image.
And how many of those people do you think would be able to buy a copy of Windows XP at $200? There is no real market there.
BS. The market is there, just not at the price that Microsoft wants to sell at.
Even so, your argument does not support the wholesale theft of software.
CDs and DVDs are much cheaper. However, even those are being pirated. There certainly is a market in China for the price that companies are selling for. If you could buy a $1 CD on the street corner that Wal-Mart sells for $10, that doesn't mean there is no market at Wal-Mart. However, with the rampant piracy, no one wants to pay the legal price.
It would be in our best interests to put up trade barriers as the Chinese have, declare foreign IP fair game, and repatriate a lot of those jobs before we find ourselves totally dependent on the whims of those who don't like us.
Closing off ourselves from the rest of the world is not the answer. The answer is to get the Chinese to enforce the IP laws they already have on their books. Then that money will be flowing to the US, rather than into the pockets of the pirates.
If the government wants to help American business, they need to stop exporting American businesses and return to exporting American products.
The government is not the group responsible. Take it up with American businesses.
Why should they get special treatment and protection for abandoning this country?
Creating a level playing field where people and companies can control and sell what they create is not "special treatment". Capitalism does not work without some concept of property. If I create something that you want and you can just take it from me, then we're not dealing in capitalism.
That's the same old RIAA nonsense argument that every song downloaded is a lost sale.
BS. You are attributing someone else's argument to me. I did not make that argument because not every pirated disk would otherwise result in a sale.
However, the argument that I did make, is that someone would have bought a legitimate copy otherwise. In the case of a CD or DVD, that someone would be a relatively wealthy individual or rental business. In the case of software, that someone would be a business or government. As of now, with piracy in China as rampant as it is, US companies get nothing for those sales.
Instead of freaking out over possible IP theft that has no effect on the bottom line, perhaps you might want to do what you can to pressure the government to stop exporting American jobs and cease helping the companies that do so.
You might want to stick on topic rather than going off on tangents that I didn't bring up. Again, you are attributing someone else's arguments to me.
Obviously, someone in China wants our CDs, DVDs, and software since they are buying them, if not from us. And since someone would buy those CDs, DVDs, and software from US were they not being pirated, then it does affect the bottom line. Considering that we're talking about a country with over a billion people, it would affect the bottom line dramatically.
Who said they weren't self sufficient? Microsoft, for example, makes money hand over fist. They've made money hand over fist for the last 20 years. But, they still get subsidies from the state of Washington.
If I could get free money just by asking for it, I sure as hell would ask. That's exactly what these companies are doing.
So you apparently really believe that, if all those Chinese who are getting pirated copies of Windows weren't able to get the pirated copies, they would be paying full price for the software (or DVD or whatever)?
Windows is a flawed example due to the fact that Linux is free and most people would switch to that. Even so, some legitimate copies of Windows would be sold in China, if only to the government, businesses, and few people who could afford it.
Let's look at the pirating of the new Star Wars DVD, which is a better example. If people could not purchase a pirated copy of the new Star Wars DVD, they would find a way to view a legal copy by renting it. The rental store in this case would have enough money to spend for a full-price copy.
That's the kind of flawed logic that has allowed the RIAA to dig themselves into the hole they're in now...
You made the previous flawed claim, not me.
We are not "hemorrhaging" cash - we just aren't producing anything these "pirates" consider worth paying for.
Nonsense. The fact is that the Chinese are paying for these goods. But, they're paying the pirates $1-$2 per copy. That may not seem like a great deal of money to you, but a dollar in China goes a lot farther than a dollar in the US. That difference is why they refuse to pay $10 for a DVD. It has nothing to do with the perceived quality of the DVD.
(Note that I don't use quotes on the term pirate. Traditionally in the computer industry, a pirate is someone who copies software and then sells it for profit. These people are pirates, even though the term has been overused in recent years for people who just merely copy software or music.)
As for the hemorrhaging cash... yes, that's occurring too. All the software companies, music companies, and movie companies would be making a great deal more money if piracy was not an issue. It takes money to make those goods and pay workers. That amount of money is not little.
I might add that if piracy were not an issue, then companies would not have to charge as much for software, CDs, and DVDs. Because of this problem, all of us who actually follow the law then pay for this problem.
Not making a sale is not the same as having some one take away from you monies that have you already made. The corps don't own the money, and their constant whining about me (or anyone) not giving it to them is just sour grapes. I don't owe them anything. They should have to work for a living like the rest of us...
The problem is not about making a sale. The problem is people copying goods, and then selling the copy.
If you copy software, a CD, or a DVD illegally, then you do owe someone some money. It cost money to make that program, music, or movie. In fact, it cost a lot of money to make that. If I don't get a bonus or raise because you and all your friends decided not to spend $10 for the software that I helped write, then that is stealing from me. And I do have a problem with that.
As for working for a living, I don't know where you get that comment. I am working for a living. And I want to get paid for it. How about you actually pay for the goods you use, just like everyone else in the civilized world.
Capitalism in action, dude - people in China won't pay $20 for the DVD, but they'll pay $1. A sale you didn't make is not lost capital, it's a failure of marketing and design.
BS. Capitalism can not operate without the notion of property. If I can not sell what I create and is rightfully mine, then we are not dealing with capitalism.
These people are selling what they stole, which is plain and simply theft.
I guess you could argue that e.g. P2P "costs sales" because it lets people find out what crap the music or video is *before* they pay good money for it, and hence they don't buy it
You have got to be kidding! Corporations don't pay taxes. Nor do the very rich.
Those corporations employ millions of Americans who do pay income tax, FICA, property tax, sales tax, etc. Every DVD, CD, or piece of software that is illegally copied overseas means less money that flows into these corporations, into those American's pockets, and into the US, state, and local governments. We could possibly employ all of our unemployed were we not losing this money.
We are screwing ourselves over by not attempting to collect the money that is rightfully ours.
Furthermore, the US Federal Govt isn't spending anything on providing any sort of healthcare for the people who do pay taxes, and highways are paid for out of petro and vehicle taxes.
I would like to see the government takes some steps to address health care. However, I can also see the sort of changes required would cost a good deal of money, which we are hemorrhaging, in part, due to piracy.
I personally could give a shit about the output of the so-called US entertainment industry until and unless they start paying me to consumer their lame crapola. I don't download off P2P because they don't have anything I want and I damned well have no interest in paying some beer-oh-crat a 6 figure salary to watch out for some multinational corp that produces crap, pays no US taxes, and has few US employees (Microsoft, for instance, is doing a lot more for employment in India than they are in the US).
I don't know about the other corporations listed, but up until recently, I worked for Microsoft. They have 58,000 employees worldwide with about 30,000 in the Seattle area alone. Most of their jobs pay above the national wage average, some far above. It's estimated that each employee at Microsoft provides another 2 jobs to the local economy. All those employees pay income tax, FICA, local property taxes, and state sales tax.
Bill Gates lives right near Seattle on Mercer Island. That's the world's richest man living here, paying income tax, property tax, and sales tax. He gives to local charities since he's actually from Washington. And he's done a lot to aid the local university.
Many Microsoft millionaires, people who formerly worked for Microsoft, have stayed in this area and contribute further to Seattle. The founder of Valve Software, creater of Half-Life, is one prime example.
Microsoft is intimately tied into the Seattle economy. I'm no fan of Microsoft, but if Microsoft gets screwed, then Seattle gets screwed. That idea alone scares me since I love my home.
The only reason companies like Dell get away with this is because they'll put thousands to millions of local people to work. (There is a multiplier effect involved where every job created also creates other jobs to service the first employees.) Then, all those workers will pay income tax, FICA, property tax, sales tax, etc.
After that's said and done, the token amount paid to Dell will be peanuts compared to the benefits for the entire community.
These corporations may not pay directly to the government. However, those corporations employ millions of Americans who pay income tax, FICA, property tax, sales tax, etc. Every DVD, CD, or piece of software that is illegally copied means less money that flows into these corporations, into those employees' pockets, and into the government.
We are screwing ourselves over by not attempting to collect the money that is rightfully ours.
At the $0.79 cost of a song on iTunes, the song is basically free unless you're living in some 3rd world country. (At which point I'd ask, what the hell are you doing on Slashdot? You should be out assembling Nikes somewhere...)
This is also true of any employee, anywhere, who favors the financial well-being of his or her family over his own selfish 'passion' in regards to company X. Responsible people choose family over business any day of the week.
I'd agree with your second sentence there. However, that doesn't logically flow from your first sentence.
If you are happy doing Job A for a good amount of money (no one working in IT is likely to be making less than the national average), then picking Job B for more money and less happiness doesn't make sense. Regardless of the reason of the reduced happiness, you're going to be rubbing that off on your family. Which would be better for your family, a happy person or a pissed-off person?
To put it another way, which would you choose?
Job A - Work is awesome, You come home happy, Family loves you
Job B - Work sucks, You come home pissed, Family hates you, You have a few more dollars
As a business, which would you rather hire? Frankly, the happy person in Job A is going to be far more stable.
So it comes back to my original argument: skill is far more important than passion, and always will be - to a competent manager, at least.
Skill is important. However, a competent manager does not want to hire someone that is completely skilled who lacks passion for the job. That worker is going to get bored. They're not going to put their heart into their work. That'll negatively affect their productivity, their longevity in the company, as well as the productivity of those around them.
It's far better to hire someone with 80% of the skills the job actually requires who has true passion for the work involved. They are far more likely to stay with the company and in the position after you spend thousands of dollars and months to years training them. They are also less likely to get lured away from to other companies because they're not hotshots and frankly, they aren't looking. Also, their family life will probably be more stable because they're happy at work and therefore going home happy as well.
When it can take months for a new engineer to come up to speed and years to develop into someone who really understands your system, then losing an engineer means losing a significant investment.
If you have an engineer that is only in it for the money, then they'll leave as soon as a bigger paycheck comes along. However, if you have someone who is really passionate about your technology, then you could pay them peanuts and they'll stay. For example, look at game developers.
THAT is why companies should hire the passionate and not the greedy.
The company should verify his academic credentials and resume. If his school says he has a PhD and all his previous employers verify he worked for them, then you can damn sure bet he knows his stuff.
This "test" at Microsoft asks basic CS 101 questions. Considering that someone with a PhD in computer science is overqualified to teach CS 101, asking those kind of questions is an insult. It's comparable to hinging the extension of a job offer on the answer you give to 2+2.
The article was talking about someone with a PhD in computer science. Morons do not get PhD's. And no hand holding will get you that far.
Microsoft asks CS 101 questions in their interviews, which include "how do you reverse a string" and "how do you insert into a linked list". Considering that PhD's are overqualified to teach CS 101, asking those types of questions are a straight insult.
A social security card or a green card are not nearly as difficult to fake as a driver's license. And there certainly is more of a demand for those documents.
I once helped manage a Chinese restaurant in Texas. The wait staff was a mixture of American and Chinese. The kitchen staff was all Mexican, except for the Taiwanese head chef. We had about 10-15 kitchen workers. When immigration was rumored to be visiting our area, only 1 Mexican cook showed up. When payday came along, everyone got checks except for the Mexicans who got paid cash - and at amounts less than minimum wage. And finally, when I filled out the income tax forms, the Mexicans were not included in any of the forms sent to the government.
Some people may say that Mexicans take jobs that Americans don't want, but that's bullshit. We constantly got applications for work in our kitchen. But they never got hired because they were American and would demand the minimum wage.
There are a lot of Mexicans in places I've lived in Texas, California, and New Mexico. They get by because they're cheap labor. Plus, the local police aren't interested in doing border patrol's work. If they stay out of trouble, they don't get deported. Over time, they have kids, and they are born American citizens. Then, they'll never get deported because their kids serve as an anchor in the US.
Those kids may be citizens, but their parents or grandparents are not.
The moron is the person bringing up the "Queen's" English to a bunch of Americans on an American website. Not only did we have a revolution to get rid of the monarchy, but that was before Queen Victoria's reign. Of course we don't speak the "Queen's" English!
My point is who cares if his English is better than your Spanish? We are in America where people speak English. You are not the one who immigrated (legally or not) to Mexico or any other place where people predominately speak Spanish.
Your language abilities are adequate to communicate. However, his are not.
First off, there is a difference between the terms Mexican and hispanic. You seem to be purposefully confusing the two. Mexican refers to citizens of Mexico. Hispanic is an ethnic term that can apply to both Mexicans or Americans.
Second, while most hispanics you know are here legally, 10+ million are here illegally. Those illegal foreigners also have jobs, pay taxes, own property, drive cars, etc. And yes, you need a social security number or drivers license for that sort of thing. But, there are ways of getting those that aren't legal.
As for the rest of your statement, I am perfectly fine with American hispanics. My first girlfriend was hispanic. And one of my groomsmen was hispanic. However, I do have a problem with illegal foreigners living in my country, regardless of where they are from. Those foreigners DO NOT have as much right to be here as I do. Period.
Slashdot Mirror
You do in fact claim that sales are revenue that belongs to the seller - regardless of whether or not the buyer has agreed to pay the terms. That is precisely what you are saying when you claim that the pirated copies are equal in dollar value to the same number of sales in the unit price demanded by the manufacturer.
...but that doesn't justify your math, here. It's just wrong. You have no reasonable estimate of how many copies of any particular item may be sold in China at $20 - only estimates of how many copies are selling at $1 or $2.
...if I were one of the mafiosos whose business it was to make sure that copies of work sold in China paid my company instead of some pirate, one of the first things I'd be looking at would be "how cheaply can I sell this and still turn a profit?" Of course, that is a pragmatic, capitalist POV which discounts any desire to take something that I can't legitimately earn. This is how we can know that the principles involved are simply grifters - gouging the market to line their own pockets, and screw the consumer - why do they have to consider the buyer if they can dictate the price by law? Who will care that the content of the CD isn't worth $10, let alone $20?
Again, you are putting words into my mouth. Go back and read my actual statements.
I give you that the piracy may even be illegal (although it is my understanding that in China it is not, since they do not subscribe to US copyright law
To enter the WTO, China had and did adopt similar copyright laws. The problem is that China is not enforcing their own laws.
Frankly, it is not unreasonable to assume that someone out of the billion+ people living in China would buy a $10 CD if piracy was stamped out. Further, it is not unreasonable to assume that even a low percentage of those billion+ people living in China would buy a $10 CD if piracy was stamped out. Even if only 1% of the population bought a CD every month, that would mean 10,000,000+ copies sold a month, based on their enormous population. That is hardly chump change and definitely better than selling nothing.
First off, you can't sell goods to one market at one price while selling it to a rich market at a higher price. That is called dumping, and it is illegal, not to mention repugnant and plain stupid. Why does China get to pay less for a CD than I do here in the US. We frickin made the CD in the first place.
Let's say record companies actually did what you propose. Then, nothing stops other companies like Wal-Mart from buying those CDs in China and selling them in America. So much for your little plan.
You still haven't explained how the earnings of these companies aren't "legitimate". For example, Oracle creates software. That is their software. They have the right to sell it at any price they want, whether you "need" it or not. They legitimately created it and legitimately own it. If you want a copy, then you pay. If you don't want a copy, then don't pay. It is that frickin easy.
If you think the content of a music CD isn't worth $10, then don't frickin buy it. You have plenty of chance to hear it on the radio or listen to it in the store before buying.
Me: I might add that if piracy were not an issue, then companies would not have to charge as much for software, CDs, and DVDs. Because of this problem, all of us who actually follow the law then pay for this problem.
You: This is a purely specious and fallacious argument. It sounds good, but if you examine the math (as above) and think about it for a moment, it is obvious bunk. The entertainment conglomerates would cut their own throats to get legislation giving them a stronger lock on the market - they've been at this for decades - they know damned well that appearing to take a loss from these "theives" is critically important to their arguments.
From what I can see, women first objectify themselves long before men come into the picture. Girls are now fighting to wear makeup and skimpy outfits in elementary school, long before their parents or the boys take notice. It's all in competition with the other girls to outdo each other. Over time, that competition with the other girls, and eventually women, evolves to an advanced level where things like anorexia come into play.
Historically, skinny wasn't a "look" until the common people had enough food to become fat. Even now, poor societies picture overweight women as more attractive than thin girls who can't afford enough to eat. As soon as everyone in our "rich" society was fat, the rich celebrities all became skinny to look different. Now thin is in and people are literally dying to become skinny.
As far as I'm concerned, women can blame themselves just as much as men for their own problems. It's their own vanity to appear like the wealthy celebrities that are doing them in. Take some frickin' responsibility for your own life, please.
I tend to agree, men and women are equally stereotyped in video games, however to a lot of feminists find men are positively stereotyped (if such a thing exists), and women are negatively stereotyped.
I don't see that. Both sexes are displayed as the sexual ideal. If feminists see a female character with big boobs, a tight ass, and the perfect figure as a negative stereotype, while simultaneously seeing a male character with a muscular chest and bulging biceps as a positive stereotype, then feminists have other issues than merely image.
And how many of those people do you think would be able to buy a copy of Windows XP at $200? There is no real market there.
BS. The market is there, just not at the price that Microsoft wants to sell at.
Even so, your argument does not support the wholesale theft of software.
CDs and DVDs are much cheaper. However, even those are being pirated. There certainly is a market in China for the price that companies are selling for. If you could buy a $1 CD on the street corner that Wal-Mart sells for $10, that doesn't mean there is no market at Wal-Mart. However, with the rampant piracy, no one wants to pay the legal price.
It would be in our best interests to put up trade barriers as the Chinese have, declare foreign IP fair game, and repatriate a lot of those jobs before we find ourselves totally dependent on the whims of those who don't like us.
Closing off ourselves from the rest of the world is not the answer. The answer is to get the Chinese to enforce the IP laws they already have on their books. Then that money will be flowing to the US, rather than into the pockets of the pirates.
If the government wants to help American business, they need to stop exporting American businesses and return to exporting American products.
The government is not the group responsible. Take it up with American businesses.
Why should they get special treatment and protection for abandoning this country?
Creating a level playing field where people and companies can control and sell what they create is not "special treatment". Capitalism does not work without some concept of property. If I create something that you want and you can just take it from me, then we're not dealing in capitalism.
That's the same old RIAA nonsense argument that every song downloaded is a lost sale.
BS. You are attributing someone else's argument to me. I did not make that argument because not every pirated disk would otherwise result in a sale.
However, the argument that I did make, is that someone would have bought a legitimate copy otherwise. In the case of a CD or DVD, that someone would be a relatively wealthy individual or rental business. In the case of software, that someone would be a business or government. As of now, with piracy in China as rampant as it is, US companies get nothing for those sales.
Instead of freaking out over possible IP theft that has no effect on the bottom line, perhaps you might want to do what you can to pressure the government to stop exporting American jobs and cease helping the companies that do so.
You might want to stick on topic rather than going off on tangents that I didn't bring up. Again, you are attributing someone else's arguments to me.
Obviously, someone in China wants our CDs, DVDs, and software since they are buying them, if not from us. And since someone would buy those CDs, DVDs, and software from US were they not being pirated, then it does affect the bottom line. Considering that we're talking about a country with over a billion people, it would affect the bottom line dramatically.
Who said they weren't self sufficient? Microsoft, for example, makes money hand over fist. They've made money hand over fist for the last 20 years. But, they still get subsidies from the state of Washington.
If I could get free money just by asking for it, I sure as hell would ask. That's exactly what these companies are doing.
So you apparently really believe that, if all those Chinese who are getting pirated copies of Windows weren't able to get the pirated copies, they would be paying full price for the software (or DVD or whatever)?
Windows is a flawed example due to the fact that Linux is free and most people would switch to that. Even so, some legitimate copies of Windows would be sold in China, if only to the government, businesses, and few people who could afford it.
Let's look at the pirating of the new Star Wars DVD, which is a better example. If people could not purchase a pirated copy of the new Star Wars DVD, they would find a way to view a legal copy by renting it. The rental store in this case would have enough money to spend for a full-price copy.
That's the kind of flawed logic that has allowed the RIAA to dig themselves into the hole they're in now...
You made the previous flawed claim, not me.
We are not "hemorrhaging" cash - we just aren't producing anything these "pirates" consider worth paying for.
Nonsense. The fact is that the Chinese are paying for these goods. But, they're paying the pirates $1-$2 per copy. That may not seem like a great deal of money to you, but a dollar in China goes a lot farther than a dollar in the US. That difference is why they refuse to pay $10 for a DVD. It has nothing to do with the perceived quality of the DVD.
(Note that I don't use quotes on the term pirate. Traditionally in the computer industry, a pirate is someone who copies software and then sells it for profit. These people are pirates, even though the term has been overused in recent years for people who just merely copy software or music.)
As for the hemorrhaging cash... yes, that's occurring too. All the software companies, music companies, and movie companies would be making a great deal more money if piracy was not an issue. It takes money to make those goods and pay workers. That amount of money is not little.
I might add that if piracy were not an issue, then companies would not have to charge as much for software, CDs, and DVDs. Because of this problem, all of us who actually follow the law then pay for this problem.
Not making a sale is not the same as having some one take away from you monies that have you already made. The corps don't own the money, and their constant whining about me (or anyone) not giving it to them is just sour grapes. I don't owe them anything. They should have to work for a living like the rest of us...
The problem is not about making a sale. The problem is people copying goods, and then selling the copy.
If you copy software, a CD, or a DVD illegally, then you do owe someone some money. It cost money to make that program, music, or movie. In fact, it cost a lot of money to make that. If I don't get a bonus or raise because you and all your friends decided not to spend $10 for the software that I helped write, then that is stealing from me. And I do have a problem with that.
As for working for a living, I don't know where you get that comment. I am working for a living. And I want to get paid for it. How about you actually pay for the goods you use, just like everyone else in the civilized world.
Capitalism in action, dude - people in China won't pay $20 for the DVD, but they'll pay $1. A sale you didn't make is not lost capital, it's a failure of marketing and design.
BS. Capitalism can not operate without the notion of property. If I can not sell what I create and is rightfully mine, then we are not dealing with capitalism.
These people are selling what they stole, which is plain and simply theft.
I guess you could argue that e.g. P2P "costs sales" because it lets people find out what crap the music or video is *before* they pay good money for it, and hence they don't buy it
I
Right... like I'm going to go out a build a road. Give me a break.
Please follow the thread. I'm not going to waste my time catching you up.
You have got to be kidding! Corporations don't pay taxes. Nor do the very rich.
Those corporations employ millions of Americans who do pay income tax, FICA, property tax, sales tax, etc. Every DVD, CD, or piece of software that is illegally copied overseas means less money that flows into these corporations, into those American's pockets, and into the US, state, and local governments. We could possibly employ all of our unemployed were we not losing this money. We are screwing ourselves over by not attempting to collect the money that is rightfully ours.
Furthermore, the US Federal Govt isn't spending anything on providing any sort of healthcare for the people who do pay taxes, and highways are paid for out of petro and vehicle taxes.
I would like to see the government takes some steps to address health care. However, I can also see the sort of changes required would cost a good deal of money, which we are hemorrhaging, in part, due to piracy.
I personally could give a shit about the output of the so-called US entertainment industry until and unless they start paying me to consumer their lame crapola. I don't download off P2P because they don't have anything I want and I damned well have no interest in paying some beer-oh-crat a 6 figure salary to watch out for some multinational corp that produces crap, pays no US taxes, and has few US employees (Microsoft, for instance, is doing a lot more for employment in India than they are in the US).
I don't know about the other corporations listed, but up until recently, I worked for Microsoft. They have 58,000 employees worldwide with about 30,000 in the Seattle area alone. Most of their jobs pay above the national wage average, some far above. It's estimated that each employee at Microsoft provides another 2 jobs to the local economy. All those employees pay income tax, FICA, local property taxes, and state sales tax.
Bill Gates lives right near Seattle on Mercer Island. That's the world's richest man living here, paying income tax, property tax, and sales tax. He gives to local charities since he's actually from Washington. And he's done a lot to aid the local university.
Many Microsoft millionaires, people who formerly worked for Microsoft, have stayed in this area and contribute further to Seattle. The founder of Valve Software, creater of Half-Life, is one prime example.
Microsoft is intimately tied into the Seattle economy. I'm no fan of Microsoft, but if Microsoft gets screwed, then Seattle gets screwed. That idea alone scares me since I love my home.
The only reason companies like Dell get away with this is because they'll put thousands to millions of local people to work. (There is a multiplier effect involved where every job created also creates other jobs to service the first employees.) Then, all those workers will pay income tax, FICA, property tax, sales tax, etc.
After that's said and done, the token amount paid to Dell will be peanuts compared to the benefits for the entire community.
These corporations may not pay directly to the government. However, those corporations employ millions of Americans who pay income tax, FICA, property tax, sales tax, etc. Every DVD, CD, or piece of software that is illegally copied means less money that flows into these corporations, into those employees' pockets, and into the government.
We are screwing ourselves over by not attempting to collect the money that is rightfully ours.
Yesterday, the federal government wasn't primarily responsible for policing piracy. Today it is.
Funny how the government chose to prioritize piracy over adequate healthcare.
No shit. Most of the guys buying these games will never have the same muscles of the characters in the game.
It's a game, people. Someone's taking all this wayyy too seriously.
You completely missed my point if that is your response.
If you think $0.79 is expensive, then you probably ARE doing slave labor - which is my whole point.
At the $0.79 cost of a song on iTunes, the song is basically free unless you're living in some 3rd world country. (At which point I'd ask, what the hell are you doing on Slashdot? You should be out assembling Nikes somewhere...)
This is also true of any employee, anywhere, who favors the financial well-being of his or her family over his own selfish 'passion' in regards to company X. Responsible people choose family over business any day of the week.
I'd agree with your second sentence there. However, that doesn't logically flow from your first sentence.
If you are happy doing Job A for a good amount of money (no one working in IT is likely to be making less than the national average), then picking Job B for more money and less happiness doesn't make sense. Regardless of the reason of the reduced happiness, you're going to be rubbing that off on your family. Which would be better for your family, a happy person or a pissed-off person?
To put it another way, which would you choose?
Job A - Work is awesome, You come home happy, Family loves you
Job B - Work sucks, You come home pissed, Family hates you, You have a few more dollars
As a business, which would you rather hire? Frankly, the happy person in Job A is going to be far more stable.
So it comes back to my original argument: skill is far more important than passion, and always will be - to a competent manager, at least.
Skill is important. However, a competent manager does not want to hire someone that is completely skilled who lacks passion for the job. That worker is going to get bored. They're not going to put their heart into their work. That'll negatively affect their productivity, their longevity in the company, as well as the productivity of those around them.
It's far better to hire someone with 80% of the skills the job actually requires who has true passion for the work involved. They are far more likely to stay with the company and in the position after you spend thousands of dollars and months to years training them. They are also less likely to get lured away from to other companies because they're not hotshots and frankly, they aren't looking. Also, their family life will probably be more stable because they're happy at work and therefore going home happy as well.
When it can take months for a new engineer to come up to speed and years to develop into someone who really understands your system, then losing an engineer means losing a significant investment.
If you have an engineer that is only in it for the money, then they'll leave as soon as a bigger paycheck comes along. However, if you have someone who is really passionate about your technology, then you could pay them peanuts and they'll stay. For example, look at game developers.
THAT is why companies should hire the passionate and not the greedy.
The company should verify his academic credentials and resume. If his school says he has a PhD and all his previous employers verify he worked for them, then you can damn sure bet he knows his stuff.
This "test" at Microsoft asks basic CS 101 questions. Considering that someone with a PhD in computer science is overqualified to teach CS 101, asking those kind of questions is an insult. It's comparable to hinging the extension of a job offer on the answer you give to 2+2.
The article was talking about someone with a PhD in computer science. Morons do not get PhD's. And no hand holding will get you that far.
Microsoft asks CS 101 questions in their interviews, which include "how do you reverse a string" and "how do you insert into a linked list". Considering that PhD's are overqualified to teach CS 101, asking those types of questions are a straight insult.
A social security card or a green card are not nearly as difficult to fake as a driver's license. And there certainly is more of a demand for those documents.
I once helped manage a Chinese restaurant in Texas. The wait staff was a mixture of American and Chinese. The kitchen staff was all Mexican, except for the Taiwanese head chef. We had about 10-15 kitchen workers. When immigration was rumored to be visiting our area, only 1 Mexican cook showed up. When payday came along, everyone got checks except for the Mexicans who got paid cash - and at amounts less than minimum wage. And finally, when I filled out the income tax forms, the Mexicans were not included in any of the forms sent to the government.
Some people may say that Mexicans take jobs that Americans don't want, but that's bullshit. We constantly got applications for work in our kitchen. But they never got hired because they were American and would demand the minimum wage.
There are a lot of Mexicans in places I've lived in Texas, California, and New Mexico. They get by because they're cheap labor. Plus, the local police aren't interested in doing border patrol's work. If they stay out of trouble, they don't get deported. Over time, they have kids, and they are born American citizens. Then, they'll never get deported because their kids serve as an anchor in the US.
Those kids may be citizens, but their parents or grandparents are not.
The moron is the person bringing up the "Queen's" English to a bunch of Americans on an American website. Not only did we have a revolution to get rid of the monarchy, but that was before Queen Victoria's reign. Of course we don't speak the "Queen's" English!
My point is who cares if his English is better than your Spanish? We are in America where people speak English. You are not the one who immigrated (legally or not) to Mexico or any other place where people predominately speak Spanish.
Your language abilities are adequate to communicate. However, his are not.
First off, there is a difference between the terms Mexican and hispanic. You seem to be purposefully confusing the two. Mexican refers to citizens of Mexico. Hispanic is an ethnic term that can apply to both Mexicans or Americans.
Second, while most hispanics you know are here legally, 10+ million are here illegally. Those illegal foreigners also have jobs, pay taxes, own property, drive cars, etc. And yes, you need a social security number or drivers license for that sort of thing. But, there are ways of getting those that aren't legal.
As for the rest of your statement, I am perfectly fine with American hispanics. My first girlfriend was hispanic. And one of my groomsmen was hispanic. However, I do have a problem with illegal foreigners living in my country, regardless of where they are from. Those foreigners DO NOT have as much right to be here as I do. Period.