Everyone understands that it's wrong when a commercial outfit pirates and sells music or films for their own profit. Only they themselves would object to it being illegal.
But non-commercial media sharing is in a very different category to that. The sharing that kids do on the Internet is just today's counterpart to what we used to do as kids back in the day, copy our records onto cassette tape for our friends, and it's certainly not criminal activity.
Except that if those kids put up a torrent, it's not usually just some copying between the friends on the block, but to thousands of people all around the world, with short delay. It can be much more powerful distributor than a commercial piracy outfit.
So yes, this is a good thing. I just wish we could return to the days when a video card was solely powered by the slot it is placed in.
NVIDIA releases constantly cards that are powered by the slot only. Some of them might be as fast as the previous generation card that required extra power lines.
And for this to be aesthetically correct, you should demand some sum that he cannot pay even in 10 lifetimes and which will completely destroy his life.:P
You don't inherently have a right to something I produce or create
You don't inherently have a right to prohibit people from copying it, distributing it, etc. So where's that leave us?
If someone makes a song, sells it, and you think you can copy it freely, then you greatly take power from the original author to sell the song anymore. It leaves us with dull automated music generators, which can generate music for almost free, which is the price people are willing to pay for it. I don't see how the equation would work otherwise.
Sure, and if you could convince a few hundred million people to do that, you probably wouldn't be commenting on Slashdot, you'd be President of the whole planet. People are not rational, and they do not behave rationally. A person is, sure, but people as a group are not, and they never have been. You can make all the theories you want about how daylight savings was always a stupid idea, but if you forget that large groups of people are involved, and that those people won't follow the logical path, you're just wasting energy typing.
How do you know that the reaction would be negative?
What if a good amount of those people would say "Good point, let's end this silliness."
this is my exact beef with the raspberry pi.... it's not really a $25/$35, it's a >$100 solution that is hard to obtain. Once the supply chain issues are fixed this may be more interesting. But at this point it's main attractive feature - price - renders it closer to vapourware than anything else.
Well, as Albert Einstein is quoted, "The most important decision we make is whether we believe we live in a friendly or hostile universe." It seems that you have made your decision.
Yesterday while I was logged on there was a comment like that (without the "it's"), and the substitution of "loose" for "lose" completely changed the sentence's meaning. When I pointed it out, my comment was moderated "troll". So apparently, many of the the moderators are just as fucking retarded as way too many commenters.
Malicious modding has certainly increased over the recent years. Today a system would make sense where you could not downmod comments but you could only upvote them.
Well, let's just say that there was multiple reasons.
What I find interesting is the passion that Linus had to make lots various core system tools (editor, assembler, kernel) completely from scratch. Like to his Sinclair way before Linux. Back then you had to make your tools, as there was not many available, but still.
I believe the N900 and N9 were much more stable and user-friendly experiences than the Symbian-based hodgepodges. If they had taken that route before, the company outcome could have been vastly different.
Linus wrote Linux because of the high price of the Unixes at the time (his own words at the time); Microsoft had nothing to do with it.
And just for fun. The relaxed social safety of Nordic countries allows you to screw around a bit and try interesting things (which might lead to innovation, as in the case with Linux...or Pirate Bay).
I actually meant the opposite, that Betteridge is mentioned only in stories, such as this, where it fits. But does not apply for all headlines with a question.
Agreed, and generally you should think carefully what you want to block. It's unethical to cut the main revenue stream of a website. Of course at some point ads can become unbearably annoying, but at that point you shouldn't visit that website at all.
Slashdot Mirror
What prevents the user from just passing along the pair of the unique code and the activation code to other people?
When *I* pay $700 for a phone, it will be used the way *I* want to use it, not the way the company I bought it from recommends.
Yeah but, you would also expect a $700 phone to do everything out of the box so that there is no need to jailbreak and modify it yourself.
Everyone understands that it's wrong when a commercial outfit pirates and sells music or films for their own profit. Only they themselves would object to it being illegal.
But non-commercial media sharing is in a very different category to that. The sharing that kids do on the Internet is just today's counterpart to what we used to do as kids back in the day, copy our records onto cassette tape for our friends, and it's certainly not criminal activity.
Except that if those kids put up a torrent, it's not usually just some copying between the friends on the block, but to thousands of people all around the world, with short delay. It can be much more powerful distributor than a commercial piracy outfit.
Interestingly, does that work only as long as piracy is kept illegal?
So yes, this is a good thing. I just wish we could return to the days when a video card was solely powered by the slot it is placed in.
NVIDIA releases constantly cards that are powered by the slot only. Some of them might be as fast as the previous generation card that required extra power lines.
And for this to be aesthetically correct, you should demand some sum that he cannot pay even in 10 lifetimes and which will completely destroy his life. :P
In this case a $100 fine would have been good. It's a nice smack in the face to get the message through but still not destroy one's life.
You don't inherently have a right to something I produce or create
You don't inherently have a right to prohibit people from copying it, distributing it, etc. So where's that leave us?
If someone makes a song, sells it, and you think you can copy it freely, then you greatly take power from the original author to sell the song anymore. It leaves us with dull automated music generators, which can generate music for almost free, which is the price people are willing to pay for it. I don't see how the equation would work otherwise.
Sure, and if you could convince a few hundred million people to do that, you probably wouldn't be commenting on Slashdot, you'd be President of the whole planet. People are not rational, and they do not behave rationally. A person is, sure, but people as a group are not, and they never have been. You can make all the theories you want about how daylight savings was always a stupid idea, but if you forget that large groups of people are involved, and that those people won't follow the logical path, you're just wasting energy typing.
How do you know that the reaction would be negative?
What if a good amount of those people would say "Good point, let's end this silliness."
I often dream about living in southeast Asia, can you tell me something additional what does it take to relocate there and get an IT job?
Agreed. Although, I wish I could "delete" some of my (embarrassing) posts from the early to mid 90's. I was young and I needed the money!
You can do that by request.
You could have spiced the article with some photos.
this is my exact beef with the raspberry pi.... it's not really a $25/$35, it's a >$100 solution that is hard to obtain. Once the supply chain issues are fixed this may be more interesting. But at this point it's main attractive feature - price - renders it closer to vapourware than anything else.
Well, as Albert Einstein is quoted, "The most important decision we make is whether we believe we live in a friendly or hostile universe." It seems that you have made your decision.
Yesterday while I was logged on there was a comment like that (without the "it's"), and the substitution of "loose" for "lose" completely changed the sentence's meaning. When I pointed it out, my comment was moderated "troll". So apparently, many of the the moderators are just as fucking retarded as way too many commenters.
Malicious modding has certainly increased over the recent years. Today a system would make sense where you could not downmod comments but you could only upvote them.
Well, let's just say that there was multiple reasons.
What I find interesting is the passion that Linus had to make lots various core system tools (editor, assembler, kernel) completely from scratch. Like to his Sinclair way before Linux. Back then you had to make your tools, as there was not many available, but still.
I believe the N900 and N9 were much more stable and user-friendly experiences than the Symbian-based hodgepodges. If they had taken that route before, the company outcome could have been vastly different.
Not everyone lives in California. Downloading is legal in Switzerland for example (and there's other places where it is).
But is it moral or immoral, that's the actual question.
Linus wrote Linux because of the high price of the Unixes at the time (his own words at the time); Microsoft had nothing to do with it.
And just for fun. The relaxed social safety of Nordic countries allows you to screw around a bit and try interesting things (which might lead to innovation, as in the case with Linux...or Pirate Bay).
I actually meant the opposite, that Betteridge is mentioned only in stories, such as this, where it fits. But does not apply for all headlines with a question.
Actually, their problem was, that even though they had N770 and N810, they started working on Linux phone (N900) too late...
Pretty much so. They continued with the clunky, sluggish and buggy Symbian for waaay to long.
Betteridge's law of headlines is mentioned only in the articles that it fits.
Normal people fund their own website if they want people to see them. If you need ads, then take it offline.
This is true, but if we start to talk about large websites you obviously can't fund them from some guy's pocket.
I tend to think it's unethical to have every move I make tracked by hundreds of different companies.
Fully agree. Although that's more about datamining than advertising...but unfortunately they are often bound together these days.
Agreed, and generally you should think carefully what you want to block. It's unethical to cut the main revenue stream of a website. Of course at some point ads can become unbearably annoying, but at that point you shouldn't visit that website at all.
Then there's also Retro City Rampage which puts GTA into 8-bit-esque world.