Our big companies would never abuse monopoly positions, would never swindle share holders, would never abuse their staff, would never seek every way possible to avoid paying taxes, would never rip off their customers, would never fix prices, would never use scare tactics, would never spread lies and disinformation about competitors, would never spy on competitors or their own staff, would never collude with their own government to break the law, would never work with an oppressive regime just for profits... Being able to trust your employees not to steal and sell hundreds of thousands of customer credit card numbers to the highest bidder has nothing to do with corporate morality or lack thereof.
Hm, that makes sense. But taking compiler authors out of it -- what about the compiled program itself? The source code, obviously a creative work. But the compiled code is... derivative? It would not exist without the source code.
.. and it becomes true. MS has been engaging in this kind of 'talk it up' behavior for years. "Okay, we admit we weren't that secure before.. but NOW,/now/ is a much different story." The sad part is, it works. If they repeat it often enough, loudly enough, and with enough different voices, the people responsible for making purchases will believe it's true. A prime example of this is the Linux v Windows TCO "debate" -- which didn't exist until MS spent millions of dollars to/make/ it exist.
Perhaps the reason this is a common attitude is that these observations are of no particular significance to pretty much anything at all in the real world. Personally, I love reading books of many genres. I don't really pay attention to whether it comes from a 'great' writer or not, and I don't wrack my brain trying to read things into other people's work. Maybe that means I'm not doing it 'properly'. However, with rare exception, I suspect I'm reading it the way the author would have wanted: for enjoyment, and mild intellectual stimulation depending on the content.
I've found flashblock to be great... right up until I came across a site that I had to use which consisted of several flash components and frequent page changes. If flashblock gets updated to allow me to whitelist sites, then I'll reinstall it. But otherwise, too many sites now require it for navigation, and clicking the button 10 times per page doesn't really appeal to me.
On the other hand, I am finding adblock+ does a very thorough job of blocking undesirables while allowing the content I need (for navigation) to come through.
Just like the phone company can't copyright phone numbers, the book store, or even publisher can't copyright an ISBN number. Copyright covers creative works. It does not cover computer generated numbers. Hmm, one wonders where things like binary opcodes that are generated in compiled code stand, since they are the product of a creative work... Of two of them, really -- the author's creation, and the makers of the compiler.
I'm just curious. I see this phenomenon where folks reply to an unrelated first post... this usually happens when there are already several replies to the article itself. Why does this occur? Let's not be disingenuous. We all know why it happens -- too many people saw that this was successful in getting their comments modded up in places like digg, and started doing it here too. And the mods encourage it -- they/should/ be getting marked offtopic, but that never seems to happen anymore. Before anyone objects - yes, I know that this practice did not originate with digg; but there is no denying that it has started happening a/lot/ more frequently since digg became popular. While that's not direct evidence of causation, it's still a pretty compelling circumstantial case.
Agreed. There are some glaring usability issues; hopefully they have been addressed. My favorite (ie, most annoying), adding a word to the dictionary:
MS Word: see a spelling error, right click and choose Add
OO: see a spelling error, right click and choose Add, then be forced to choose between three different dictionaries to add the word to.
Perhaps with this release, they've clued in that most people (even geeks like me) don't actually give a shit which dictionary it lands in, and want to simply add the word and move on.
Gah! You know this is slashdot, right? You're supposed to bluster and change the subject, perhaps toss out a straw-man for cover whilst you flee. Shame on you!
And yet the actual numbers indicate differently. Excluding immigration and emigration, more are being born than dying. Including those numbers, more are immigrating than emigrating (net gain of 1 per 26 seconds). Immigrants pay into the system as well.
The numerous old are living off a smaller number of young. You do realize that barring a draft and assuming a continued population growth rate of anything greater than 1.0, the number of working young will always be larger than the number of retired old?
I was beginning to think there was something wrong with my clock. It showed the day as being almost over, but I hadn't yet reached my daily quota of at least a dozen/.ers who quote/misquote/paraphrase "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety" and get modded up for it.
However, you have provided #12 for me - I can now safely go to sleep and be assured that the sun will rise on the morrow - thanks!
That probably came across as overly harsh, but versions of this phrase are getting repeated so often (here and more broadly) that it's already reached the point where I think a lot of people don't actually consider its significance.
"another idiot" == "one idiot" which is not a group, but a singular individual. Case in point: if what you said was correct, shouldn't you have written "YMI (Yet more idiot)"?
I call BS on the usability arguement, sorry. My Creative Zen Nano is just as easy to use as my daughter's iPod if not easier. The only reason iPods sell as well as they do is name and hype
While I can't argue your opinion, I can and do disagree with your stating it as fact. For me, personally, my wife's ipod was simply easier to use than my iAudio x5 which is now about 1.5yrs old. For me, it "just worked" and was very comfortable. This has nothing to do with the marketing or hype; my opinion is formed form my experiences, not from commercials with pretty pastel colors.
That being said -- yes, there is certainly always going to be a sizeable portion of the population who does things because it's the "in" thing to do. But there are two things keep in mind. a) building a name as a good product and maintaining it for years is extremely difficult to do if you don't actually have a good product; and b) having a well-known popular name brand is in fact the goal of any company who seeks to make a profit -- if they succeed at it, it doesn't automatically mean the product sucks. (If that were the case, avoid google -- extremely high name recognition, because they're simply that good at what they do)
I'm the last person to deny that people are sheep. But I also am able to accept that just because something is popular with the sheeple doesn't always inherently make it crap.
You be sure to tell that to all their customers. Because oddly enough, the overwhelming majority of those millions of people don't seem to have these problems you report.
Usability and simplicity. I've had three other music players, some of them having received very good reviews (cowon products). But I used my wife's iPod, and it is simply a better, more user-friendly experience. I was disappointed to go back to my old player; and will very likely be replacing it with an ipod when it dies.
Itunes is another reason for the casual user. They don't care about formats. Most of them can't tell the difference in quality. They don't need to transfer it to a million different locations. They know they can hear a song they like, and own it, and enjoy it -- relatively cheaply, and without any headache or hassle. I'm not a fan of it for the reasons you mentioned, but the vast majority of the paying public doesn't really care about those issues. Most aren't even aware of them.
The only good pun is a really bad pun; so in effect, there's no such/thing/ as a good pun. For example, one of the people in this thread used a cheesy pun (watt instead of what, a pun only on the basis of spelling). That was not bad(good) - it was just cheesy. Truly bad (good) puns require at least a double-entendre, which must be valid in both meanings, without relying on any cheap shortcuts like spelling and pronunciation. However, if a/third/ meaning can be added to a bad(pun) that/is/ based on spelling/pronunciation, then it crosses the realm from bad(good) into horrible(great). And if you can cram four meanings, it is a twisted, nasty (spectacular, wonderful)sight to behold.
What I don't understand is this: if someone objects to these practices, why continue to shop at the places that enforce them? Does it mean so much that you'll "take a stand for your principles" , but maybe not/quite/ so much that you're willing to forgo the purchase itself? Seems rather silly to me -- I don't like having my bags checked , so I don't shop at the places that require it.
I bought every season available of Heroes, Battlestar Galactica, The Office, and My Name is Earl on iTunes.
Well I for one am not a slave to my television. Are you sure about that?
> taking something to which you have no right is stealing.
Correct, but if if I steal a CD from a music store, there's certainly punitive fines built into the law, but the store doesn't get to charge me $750 per CD (or is it per track?) just because it feels like it.
Let's also consider that the John Doe lawsuits might not be the most precise legal tool either? It's about personal responsibility for the things you choose to do, not about your attempts to justify them. If the store/did/ attempt to charge you $750 per CD, that would/also/ be within their rights. You, as a consumer, have three choices: buy it, do without, or steal. If you opt to steal, that's your choice -- but don't try to call it something else to justify it.
Semantics don't really address the issue either. By nearly all of the definitions here, stealing is the correct term. Other sources show the same.
That the distributors have the sole right to distribute the music doesn't make it right or fair. In other words -- something holding status quo does not necessarily make it right For the most part, I agree. But I maintain that this belief does not give you, me, or anyone the right to take things which do not belong to us.
You've addressed the various arguments against it, but in so doing have set up a straw man. Fact: taking something to which you have no right is stealing. You can justify it by saying "well, I refer other people and so they get more sales", but this doesn't negate the fact that you, personally, are stealing when you download music without paying for it. When you strip away all the fancy rationalizations, the underlying fact remains the same: the publishers have the sole right to distribute this content. They were given this right by the artists who created the content. This means that for better or worse, artists have agreed to this. While I strongly disagree with the way the RIAA is pursuing this, and I find the type of 'deals' that the artists have agreed to (often out of ignorance) disgusting, that is between the artist and the label. You don't enter into it. Period.
*waits for the inevitable flamebait mod that occurs when one goes against/. groupthink *
Slashdot Mirror
Heh, sweet-- was it always like that, and I was just blind?
You've given me some food for thought, and potentially (when 'waiting is filled) a new perspective.. Thanks for that.
Hm, that makes sense. But taking compiler authors out of it -- what about the compiled program itself? The source code, obviously a creative work. But the compiled code is ... derivative? It would not exist without the source code.
.. and it becomes true. MS has been engaging in this kind of 'talk it up' behavior for years. "Okay, we admit we weren't that secure before.. but NOW, /now/ is a much different story." The sad part is, it works. If they repeat it often enough, loudly enough, and with enough different voices, the people responsible for making purchases will believe it's true. A prime example of this is the Linux v Windows TCO "debate" -- which didn't exist until MS spent millions of dollars to /make/ it exist.
Perhaps the reason this is a common attitude is that these observations are of no particular significance to pretty much anything at all in the real world. Personally, I love reading books of many genres. I don't really pay attention to whether it comes from a 'great' writer or not, and I don't wrack my brain trying to read things into other people's work. Maybe that means I'm not doing it 'properly'. However, with rare exception, I suspect I'm reading it the way the author would have wanted: for enjoyment, and mild intellectual stimulation depending on the content.
I've found flashblock to be great... right up until I came across a site that I had to use which consisted of several flash components and frequent page changes. If flashblock gets updated to allow me to whitelist sites, then I'll reinstall it. But otherwise, too many sites now require it for navigation, and clicking the button 10 times per page doesn't really appeal to me. On the other hand, I am finding adblock+ does a very thorough job of blocking undesirables while allowing the content I need (for navigation) to come through.
Agreed. There are some glaring usability issues; hopefully they have been addressed. My favorite (ie, most annoying), adding a word to the dictionary:
- MS Word: see a spelling error, right click and choose Add
- OO: see a spelling error, right click and choose Add, then be forced to choose between three different dictionaries to add the word to.
Perhaps with this release, they've clued in that most people (even geeks like me) don't actually give a shit which dictionary it lands in, and want to simply add the word and move on.Gah! You know this is slashdot, right? You're supposed to bluster and change the subject, perhaps toss out a straw-man for cover whilst you flee. Shame on you!
And yet the actual numbers indicate differently. Excluding immigration and emigration, more are being born than dying. Including those numbers, more are immigrating than emigrating (net gain of 1 per 26 seconds). Immigrants pay into the system as well.
http://www.census.gov/population/www/popclockus.html
I, for one, do not welcome anybody. Now get out of my swarm. Oop--
DRIVER_IRQL_COMMUNICATIONS_ERROR
I was beginning to think there was something wrong with my clock. It showed the day as being almost over, but I hadn't yet reached my daily quota of at least a dozen /.ers who quote/misquote/paraphrase "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety" and get modded up for it.
However, you have provided #12 for me - I can now safely go to sleep and be assured that the sun will rise on the morrow - thanks!
That probably came across as overly harsh, but versions of this phrase are getting repeated so often (here and more broadly) that it's already reached the point where I think a lot of people don't actually consider its significance.
"another idiot" == "one idiot" which is not a group, but a singular individual. Case in point: if what you said was correct, shouldn't you have written "YMI (Yet more idiot)"?
While I can't argue your opinion, I can and do disagree with your stating it as fact. For me, personally, my wife's ipod was simply easier to use than my iAudio x5 which is now about 1.5yrs old. For me, it "just worked" and was very comfortable. This has nothing to do with the marketing or hype; my opinion is formed form my experiences, not from commercials with pretty pastel colors.
That being said -- yes, there is certainly always going to be a sizeable portion of the population who does things because it's the "in" thing to do. But there are two things keep in mind. a) building a name as a good product and maintaining it for years is extremely difficult to do if you don't actually have a good product; and b) having a well-known popular name brand is in fact the goal of any company who seeks to make a profit -- if they succeed at it, it doesn't automatically mean the product sucks. (If that were the case, avoid google -- extremely high name recognition, because they're simply that good at what they do)
I'm the last person to deny that people are sheep. But I also am able to accept that just because something is popular with the sheeple doesn't always inherently make it crap.
You be sure to tell that to all their customers. Because oddly enough, the overwhelming majority of those millions of people don't seem to have these problems you report.
Usability and simplicity. I've had three other music players, some of them having received very good reviews (cowon products). But I used my wife's iPod, and it is simply a better, more user-friendly experience. I was disappointed to go back to my old player; and will very likely be replacing it with an ipod when it dies.
Itunes is another reason for the casual user. They don't care about formats. Most of them can't tell the difference in quality. They don't need to transfer it to a million different locations. They know they can hear a song they like, and own it, and enjoy it -- relatively cheaply, and without any headache or hassle. I'm not a fan of it for the reasons you mentioned, but the vast majority of the paying public doesn't really care about those issues. Most aren't even aware of them.
Glad I could clear up the confusion there.
What I don't understand is this: if someone objects to these practices, why continue to shop at the places that enforce them? Does it mean so much that you'll "take a stand for your principles" , but maybe not /quite/ so much that you're willing to forgo the purchase itself? Seems rather silly to me -- I don't like having my bags checked , so I don't shop at the places that require it.
Correct, but if if I steal a CD from a music store, there's certainly punitive fines built into the law, but the store doesn't get to charge me $750 per CD (or is it per track?) just because it feels like it.
Let's also consider that the John Doe lawsuits might not be the most precise legal tool either?
It's about personal responsibility for the things you choose to do, not about your attempts to justify them. If the store
You've addressed the various arguments against it, but in so doing have set up a straw man. Fact: taking something to which you have no right is stealing. You can justify it by saying "well, I refer other people and so they get more sales", but this doesn't negate the fact that you, personally, are stealing when you download music without paying for it. When you strip away all the fancy rationalizations, the underlying fact remains the same: the publishers have the sole right to distribute this content. They were given this right by the artists who created the content. This means that for better or worse, artists have agreed to this. While I strongly disagree with the way the RIAA is pursuing this, and I find the type of 'deals' that the artists have agreed to (often out of ignorance) disgusting, that is between the artist and the label. You don't enter into it. Period.
*waits for the inevitable flamebait mod that occurs when one goes against /. groupthink *