"I'll take Lawrence Lessig's [lessig.org] ideas over Mr. Stallman's any day."
Here here. Stallman seems to be living in a dream world. His heart is in the right place, but everything he says has an extremist slant that I can't get behind. Its important to remember that the "content industry" is not evil and the people who run it are not demons. They are a product of a particular legal/regulatory environment. By all means act to change the landscape, but don't villify people who see an oportunity and grab it. They act exactly as they should be expected to act.
By the same token, free software != divine salvation. It is not necessary to duck and cover every time someone cues up an mp3 ("its a copyrighted technology! Don't you get it!! You ignorant heretic!!!"). Ogg is great; use it because it creates high quality recordings and maybe because you support its development model, but don't pretend you're some kind of moral crusader.
RMS's statement that people have the right to share copies of published media is at best indefensible. "Share copies" is just as missleading as "intellectual property." You don't "share copies," you "make copies" and then give them away. This may or may not be acceptable to you; the point is that Stallman is playing the same game as the "content producers," just on the opposite side of the field.
I do agree, however, that "content producers" is a bad term. Record labels do not produce any of the material they sell, they act on behalf of those that do. They have insinuated themselves into the process. On the other hand I could see movie studios wearing that label without being blatantly hypocritical.
Yes but only if you own the original. If I have netflix and I burn all the movies I rent with no intent to sell them I'm still violating the copyright (not that I do that...).
Does the MPAA own the copies they are given for rating purposes?
Wait a minute...The "not for monetary gain" defense actually works?! Isn't that a standard part of the anti-piracy line, that it doesn't matter if you don't want to sell it, its still illegal?
Y'know there was a time when people were encouraged to feel welcomed in schools. Schools are supposed to be a vital part of the community, and its getting so you can't enter your local grade school without a blood analysis and background check. Treat them like prisons and people will think of them as prisons, with all of the social malladies and baggage that come with that.
And on another note, why is it not enough to just ask for ID and have parents sign something? Its one thing to watch the doors to keep drug dealers out, its another to ask parents to submit to retinal scans.
I'd like a 5th provision to the agreement. The data will not be linked to my identity. I don't mind providing anonymous stats but I want at least a little privacy.
So make you info available on your own terms. Great idea, but why barter with each individual when you can still buy their info wholesale. Data wholesalers aren't just going to go away, and this still doesn't keep others from tracking you without your permission.
Well, you seem to have outlined all the major headings at apple.com/macosx.
Seriously though, I'm a mac user, and I don't have much use for any of the iLife apps. I do love Spotlight though. Expose is nice, dashboard is cute, but spotlight is the real seller.
Look, the point is, there has been an abuse of power. It is clear that we are fighting a dangerous enemy, the death toll rises in Iraq every week and I'm sure they want to strike us here as well, even if (despite huge numbers of secret National Security Letters) there has been no sign of any activity here (funny how that "warning level" hasn't risen since the elections). But I stand by my original statement, and you would seem to confirm it. Information sharing is what is needed. It was known that they were planning an attack, but they did not act on that information apropriately. Its easy to say so in hindsight, but that should make it even easier now to identify the solution to the problem.
So is the solution more effective information sharing? Or is it broadly expanded wiretapping and surveillance powers without the approval of a judge? Library records don't get up and run away. Why is it so important that they be completely unfettered by the pesky judicial branch?
Law enforcement has never needed the kind of powers the Patriot Act provides in the past. Its especially hard to justify when you consider the information the CIA had prior to 9/11. It was not a case of not enough information, it was a failure to act. the Patriot Act is a solution for the wrong problem. The restructuring of the intelligence organizations was the correct solution. The P.A. was a mad grab for power in the wake of disaster.
what the hell are "sovereign options"?? It seems like they wanted that particular adjective in their somewhere but they weren't sure what it should modify.
Slashdot Mirror
I use Gmail to check all my accounts. Never had a problem (that I know of...)
He is or he isn't. And in this case, he isn't.
Here here. Stallman seems to be living in a dream world. His heart is in the right place, but everything he says has an extremist slant that I can't get behind. Its important to remember that the "content industry" is not evil and the people who run it are not demons. They are a product of a particular legal/regulatory environment. By all means act to change the landscape, but don't villify people who see an oportunity and grab it. They act exactly as they should be expected to act.
By the same token, free software != divine salvation. It is not necessary to duck and cover every time someone cues up an mp3 ("its a copyrighted technology! Don't you get it!! You ignorant heretic!!!"). Ogg is great; use it because it creates high quality recordings and maybe because you support its development model, but don't pretend you're some kind of moral crusader.
RMS's statement that people have the right to share copies of published media is at best indefensible. "Share copies" is just as missleading as "intellectual property." You don't "share copies," you "make copies" and then give them away. This may or may not be acceptable to you; the point is that Stallman is playing the same game as the "content producers," just on the opposite side of the field.
I do agree, however, that "content producers" is a bad term. Record labels do not produce any of the material they sell, they act on behalf of those that do. They have insinuated themselves into the process. On the other hand I could see movie studios wearing that label without being blatantly hypocritical.
I think what you meant to say is "Intelligent Design is false, thus is junk science, and should be tought in the seminary."
Yes but only if you own the original. If I have netflix and I burn all the movies I rent with no intent to sell them I'm still violating the copyright (not that I do that...).
Does the MPAA own the copies they are given for rating purposes?
Wait a minute...The "not for monetary gain" defense actually works?! Isn't that a standard part of the anti-piracy line, that it doesn't matter if you don't want to sell it, its still illegal?
Yes, but they don't control its implimentation. Heck, they don't even have an implimentation.
XMLHTTPRequest is too important for MS not to try and control it. I wouldn't rule out a good ol' "embrace and extend" move.
And on another note, why is it not enough to just ask for ID and have parents sign something? Its one thing to watch the doors to keep drug dealers out, its another to ask parents to submit to retinal scans.
I'd like a 5th provision to the agreement. The data will not be linked to my identity. I don't mind providing anonymous stats but I want at least a little privacy.
So make you info available on your own terms. Great idea, but why barter with each individual when you can still buy their info wholesale. Data wholesalers aren't just going to go away, and this still doesn't keep others from tracking you without your permission.
So when does Google turn on this shadowy network they've been building and flip yet another industry on its head?
Seriously though, I'm a mac user, and I don't have much use for any of the iLife apps. I do love Spotlight though. Expose is nice, dashboard is cute, but spotlight is the real seller.
...The Hummer of power supplies.
I don't think Microsoft gave their blessing to the iPod.
Look, the point is, there has been an abuse of power. It is clear that we are fighting a dangerous enemy, the death toll rises in Iraq every week and I'm sure they want to strike us here as well, even if (despite huge numbers of secret National Security Letters) there has been no sign of any activity here (funny how that "warning level" hasn't risen since the elections). But I stand by my original statement, and you would seem to confirm it. Information sharing is what is needed. It was known that they were planning an attack, but they did not act on that information apropriately. Its easy to say so in hindsight, but that should make it even easier now to identify the solution to the problem. So is the solution more effective information sharing? Or is it broadly expanded wiretapping and surveillance powers without the approval of a judge? Library records don't get up and run away. Why is it so important that they be completely unfettered by the pesky judicial branch?
Law enforcement has never needed the kind of powers the Patriot Act provides in the past. Its especially hard to justify when you consider the information the CIA had prior to 9/11. It was not a case of not enough information, it was a failure to act. the Patriot Act is a solution for the wrong problem. The restructuring of the intelligence organizations was the correct solution. The P.A. was a mad grab for power in the wake of disaster.
Thats not a bad troll in and of itself. But seriously, go back under your bridge.
Hazzaaaaaaaaa!!!
Well, since I live in Brooklyn I guess I'll just trot over to my friendly neighborhood Priceritephoto...
where can I get it? I don't see any useful links in the article or on the google earth page.
what the hell are "sovereign options"?? It seems like they wanted that particular adjective in their somewhere but they weren't sure what it should modify.
Off topic I know, have mercy.
perhaps the depth of the comment pool will increase with time. It they introduced threaded comments it could be a serious competitor.
eurotrash? huh?!