God did not lie about the fruit of the forbidden tree causing death when consumed. Careful analysis of the verse indicates that eating of the fruit will ultimately result in death, not necessarily cause it immediately. I believe the quote from God is "..or you will surely die." This does not mean you will surely die immediately, just that now that you've eaten this fruit, you will die some day. Beforehand, that was not the case.
"The higher prices reflect an imbalance between supply and demand"
Yeah, and I'm sure your profit margin has absolutely nothing to do with it.
As an environment-conscious individual, I relish higher gas prices. $3 a gallon? Why not $5 or $10? I truly believe hitting people in the wallet is the *only* way to incite change in habits as deeply-rooted as our gasoline addiction. People need to realize that carpooling, investing in very fuel-efficient vehicles (for example, I drive a manual transmission Saturn--I average 30mpg city) or looking toward hybrid/bio-diesel options is not just a fanciful dream but a necessary reality. Alternative fuel vehicles are a reality, but the only way we will leverage them into the mainstream is through the power of our collective consumer's almighty dollar (and pound, and yen...;)
I never understood the MPAA/RIAA's approach to curbing piracy and increasing legitimate sales by imposing restrictions on those who pay for content. Think about it: a pirated album or movie comes with zero DRM and thus can be used for any purpose on any player an unlimited number of times. If I pay for that same album and purchase it through iTunes, I can only listen to it on my computer and my iPod. So here's my choice: pay for restricted content or download DRM-free content FOR free. Umm, who in their right mind would elect for the former?
A more proactive approach to curbing piracy would not restrict the rights of the consumer, but expand them. Instead of pouring millions of dollars into encryption schemes that are cracked before they're released, invest that money into innovations like exclusive or pre-release content for paying customers. I might feel better about buying an album online if a) I knew I could use that album any way I want and b) got a little extra in return, like an interview with the band, an exclusive track, preferential treatment for concert tickets, or whatever. I know these exclusive tracks and interviews could just as easily be pirated, but it's the thought that counts. If you (the RIAA/MPAA) respect my right and desire to use my movies and music how I want, I'll be more likely to respect your right to compensation for said goods. Either way, putting digital handcuffs on your paying customers is definitely *not* the right approach.
OK, so our down-under comrades may have it bad if this goes through, but how much can one expect that the power-hungry RIAA is eyeballing the use of such tactics here in the US?
That besides, it raises a slew of other questions, like this scenario that could be used as sort of an "SDOS" (single denial of service) attack: Joe Aussie pays for a 3.0mbit link down in Perth, where he also enjoys the comfort and convenience of wireless Internet. How difficult would it be for anyone, and I mean damn near *anyone* to login to his network and start pirating anything from music to movies to God knows what else? Forget WEP encryption, recent articles have demonstrated that most networks could theoretically be cracked in minutes by someone with a decent knowledge of how it works. Never mind the hundreds upon thousands of networks that will go unprotected, and incidentally, exactly what methods will they employ to determine what kind of traffic (legitimate or pirate) is crossing the lines in Australia?
I haven't been a Geek Squad agent for very long (approx. four months) but I may be able to shed some light on the situation.
As a previous member posted, and as a general principle of life, in any group of individuals you will inevitably encounter the lazy, incompetent or otherwise inept, and Geek Squad is no exception. Many GS agents are attracted to the job because of the generous discount at Best Buy, and/or have little or no passion for computers and information technology. Many agents are lazy and would simply rather ship the unit off to service and have you guys deal with it.
But just as the same previous member posted, most--if not the majority--of GS agents are very passionate about IT, are very knowledgeable about computer diagnosis and repair, and deal with problems as per SOP and don't pass off petty issues to service. You also have to consider that when we're dealing face-to-face with oftentimes clueless customers, time is a huge factor. When a customer is sitting there at the counter in front of a long line of other customers asking me why sound isn't coming out of his laptop's speakers, I'll probably check the device manager, volume control, and run a few audio apps to generate sound. If I play with it for 5 or 10 minutes (10 minutes is an eternity when there is a huge line) and still can't figure it out, then I'll probably send it to service. You guys get the laptop at the service center and it turns out there was a hardware volume control I didn't notice that was turned all the way down. You turn it up, it works, you call me a moron, the cycle continues.
It may also amuse you to know, Zenitram, that many Geek Squad Agents are quick to blame the service center for similar incompetence. I'm always sending back units to service because the original problem was not solved properly, or the service tech did not read/understand my notes. It's also very frustrating for the customer, and thus myself, when a unit goes out for an issue utterly unrelated to the hard drive (such as no audio) and it comes back with a formatted HDD with a nice little note saying basically "your audio works but oh, by the way, you lost all your shit. sorry. reinstall windows with your OEM discs. thanks for using best buy service!" It goes both ways.
Slashdot Mirror
God did not lie about the fruit of the forbidden tree causing death when consumed. Careful analysis of the verse indicates that eating of the fruit will ultimately result in death, not necessarily cause it immediately. I believe the quote from God is "..or you will surely die." This does not mean you will surely die immediately, just that now that you've eaten this fruit, you will die some day. Beforehand, that was not the case.
"The higher prices reflect an imbalance between supply and demand"
;)
Yeah, and I'm sure your profit margin has absolutely nothing to do with it.
As an environment-conscious individual, I relish higher gas prices. $3 a gallon? Why not $5 or $10? I truly believe hitting people in the wallet is the *only* way to incite change in habits as deeply-rooted as our gasoline addiction. People need to realize that carpooling, investing in very fuel-efficient vehicles (for example, I drive a manual transmission Saturn--I average 30mpg city) or looking toward hybrid/bio-diesel options is not just a fanciful dream but a necessary reality. Alternative fuel vehicles are a reality, but the only way we will leverage them into the mainstream is through the power of our collective consumer's almighty dollar (and pound, and yen...
I never understood the MPAA/RIAA's approach to curbing piracy and increasing legitimate sales by imposing restrictions on those who pay for content. Think about it: a pirated album or movie comes with zero DRM and thus can be used for any purpose on any player an unlimited number of times. If I pay for that same album and purchase it through iTunes, I can only listen to it on my computer and my iPod. So here's my choice: pay for restricted content or download DRM-free content FOR free. Umm, who in their right mind would elect for the former?
A more proactive approach to curbing piracy would not restrict the rights of the consumer, but expand them. Instead of pouring millions of dollars into encryption schemes that are cracked before they're released, invest that money into innovations like exclusive or pre-release content for paying customers. I might feel better about buying an album online if a) I knew I could use that album any way I want and b) got a little extra in return, like an interview with the band, an exclusive track, preferential treatment for concert tickets, or whatever. I know these exclusive tracks and interviews could just as easily be pirated, but it's the thought that counts. If you (the RIAA/MPAA) respect my right and desire to use my movies and music how I want, I'll be more likely to respect your right to compensation for said goods. Either way, putting digital handcuffs on your paying customers is definitely *not* the right approach.
OK, so our down-under comrades may have it bad if this goes through, but how much can one expect that the power-hungry RIAA is eyeballing the use of such tactics here in the US?
That besides, it raises a slew of other questions, like this scenario that could be used as sort of an "SDOS" (single denial of service) attack: Joe Aussie pays for a 3.0mbit link down in Perth, where he also enjoys the comfort and convenience of wireless Internet. How difficult would it be for anyone, and I mean damn near *anyone* to login to his network and start pirating anything from music to movies to God knows what else? Forget WEP encryption, recent articles have demonstrated that most networks could theoretically be cracked in minutes by someone with a decent knowledge of how it works. Never mind the hundreds upon thousands of networks that will go unprotected, and incidentally, exactly what methods will they employ to determine what kind of traffic (legitimate or pirate) is crossing the lines in Australia?
I haven't been a Geek Squad agent for very long (approx. four months) but I may be able to shed some light on the situation.
As a previous member posted, and as a general principle of life, in any group of individuals you will inevitably encounter the lazy, incompetent or otherwise inept, and Geek Squad is no exception. Many GS agents are attracted to the job because of the generous discount at Best Buy, and/or have little or no passion for computers and information technology. Many agents are lazy and would simply rather ship the unit off to service and have you guys deal with it.
But just as the same previous member posted, most--if not the majority--of GS agents are very passionate about IT, are very knowledgeable about computer diagnosis and repair, and deal with problems as per SOP and don't pass off petty issues to service. You also have to consider that when we're dealing face-to-face with oftentimes clueless customers, time is a huge factor. When a customer is sitting there at the counter in front of a long line of other customers asking me why sound isn't coming out of his laptop's speakers, I'll probably check the device manager, volume control, and run a few audio apps to generate sound. If I play with it for 5 or 10 minutes (10 minutes is an eternity when there is a huge line) and still can't figure it out, then I'll probably send it to service. You guys get the laptop at the service center and it turns out there was a hardware volume control I didn't notice that was turned all the way down. You turn it up, it works, you call me a moron, the cycle continues.
It may also amuse you to know, Zenitram, that many Geek Squad Agents are quick to blame the service center for similar incompetence. I'm always sending back units to service because the original problem was not solved properly, or the service tech did not read/understand my notes. It's also very frustrating for the customer, and thus myself, when a unit goes out for an issue utterly unrelated to the hard drive (such as no audio) and it comes back with a formatted HDD with a nice little note saying basically "your audio works but oh, by the way, you lost all your shit. sorry. reinstall windows with your OEM discs. thanks for using best buy service!" It goes both ways.
-austin