That's true, to an extent. Some people are unredeemable pirates, and will never earn the studios a penny. Some people, for instance, might pirate because they missed an episode of 24 and want to watch the rest of the series, or to watch the prequel to an upcoming movie because the rental place is out of it. I'd argue that those people help the studio with their piracy (by watching the next episode of 24 after they missed one, or getting addicted to the show after seeing an episode or two over bittorrent. I'm saying that studios need to find a way to increase that kind of piracy (or not discourage it totally), while cutting down on the negative piracy. All I'm saying is that not all piracy is bad, and that the business model can be adapted to be harmed less and helped more by piracy.
Core 2 Duo desktop and laptop chips were formally announced in July (the 27th or so). Desktop chips (Conre) were launched then, and started shipping (with models coming out in serious numbers over the last two weeks). Notebook chips (Merom) were "launched" today, which means we can look at pretty benchmarks as Intel starts shipping them out to most OEMs. We will see the processors in computers at stores in a few weeks.
Re:Confusion About Abbie Hoffman
on
Steal This Film
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
in fact, there's hasn't been any objective documentaries made, ever. the views of the filmmakers always shines through one way or another.
There's a massive difference between "filmmaker's view shining through" and "film created to make a point". I agree with you on the former, but we're discussing the latter here. No offense, but your point isn't really relevant (albeit likely accurate). What we're talking about here are "documentaries" designed to sell an idea. there exist documentaries that either attempt to tell both sides equally or just aren't out to sell you on something, but they're becoming more and more rare.
Re:Don't Understand?
on
Steal This Film
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Sounds to me like they understand the net perfectly, because P2P networks as they're currently used *are* a threat to their livelihoods. Note that this isn't the fault of the technology, but the people using it. And the threat isn't all that big or serious, but it is there.
Not necessarily. There are some risks to P2P for content providers, but P2P can be helpful in some instances (getting you hooked on a show, like what the high piracy rate of "33" did for BSG). A model based around P2P could work even better. P2P might harm some business models (release a crappy movie, overhype it, and hope everyone sees it on week 1), but other business models survive.
Re:Confusion About Abbie Hoffman
on
Steal This Film
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
The tendency to make biased documentaries is pretty old (relatively). See "Moore, Michael" or "Fox News", or anything like that. This is simply the extension of polarized politics to another field. It's not like "the other side" is anywhere near unbiased on the issue. Mainstream media just takes orders from corporate headquarters and assumes that filesharing is bad and costs them money.
My dad's a vet. We live in a relatively well-off county. The Humane Society has some sort of rebate for spayings and neuterings for poor families. The vet covers half, and the HS covers half (something like that). Anyhow, everyone tries (and generally suceeds) at playing the "I'm poor" game and going for the lower rate. These are people who live in 1.5-2 million dollar homes and drive up to the clinic in Hummers or Lexuses.
People won't deal with having to pay a "rich tax" if they find out about it. Not to mention that slashdotters will complain (with some merit) at having to provide their financial information just to get cable.
It's not the particular case people have an issue with, it's the principle. Volunteer hackers cracking people's systems for the FBI? What do you want to bet that we only saw this case because the guy was extra double guilty? I mean, if this gets written up as legal, then the RIAA can have people hack our computers to look for music. When we get to the point where we can't expect privacy anywhere on our computers, we're pretty screwed. Also, from the technical point of view, it'd be nice to be able to say "X, Y, and Z are hacking and wrong and can always be stopped" (where X,Y, and Z are hacking, keylogging, etc.), rather than being like "Hey, I'm ZoneAlarm. I see a problem. I guess I have to check with the FBI to see if this is legal hacking or not."
There are a lot of browser-based tools in the workplace that need ActiveX. And everytime someone has a tool like that, they're stuck on Windows until the replace the tool. When you add up the cost to re-code a lot of your intraweb-based tools, and your customized Access databases (going to whatever OO.o uses and basic Perl/PHP/Javascript/etc), it quickly becomes cheaper to stick to Windows
I found out yesterday that someone I knew last year died of liver cancer over the summer. She was 19. I think it's safe to say that there are plenty of people out there who don't give a flying fuck if Sony gets good press about this. If it brings us a cure to cancer a year, a day, an hour sooner, it's a damn fine thing. I just hope most PS3 owners find out about it, and maybe we can cure cancer. If a company makes an extra million or two in the process, good for them.
On the plus side, we'll get a bit more legal precedent and discussion about exactly what an IP address proves. Since 99% of RIAA cases settle out of court and about.5% are dropped (made up, quasi-accurate numbers), there haven't been many cases establishing how you get someone based on an IP address.
There are instances where obscure Star Force titles haven't been cracked - because it's too much work for little gain with smaller titles, but anything you or I have heard of in any form of mainstream game press has almost certainly been cracked. And it only takes one cracker to get it cracked for good.
I mean really, all SCO can do is be an ass to an IBM guy. I mean, they wouldn't need to pull something like this to ask remotely relevant questions, and since IBM isn't gonna settle to save this guy some embarassment, all SCO gets to do is what they always do: be petty, retarded dumbasses.
SoaP cost $30 million to make. They'll make all their money back in the US box office (or close to it). Then there's the foreign box office (where this may not be remotely hot, but could bring in some cash). Then second-run movies, like college campuses, etc. I work at a college theater (head of ushering), and I'm expecting big crowds to Snakes when we get it (mid-October). That's a lot more money. Lastly, DVDs and DVD rentals. It'll make it's backers a lot of money. It'll have a better return on investment than a lot of other BIG MOVIE blockbusters.
Don't be too hasty there - you can bet your bottom dollar that whoever gets said ships to said planets will be as interested in mineral-heavy planets as they will be in living space. Not to mention that we may well be out hunting for hydrogen to burn (having exhausted our gas giants)
This makes the local news (and maybe gets picked up somewhere), and a few pissed off IE6 users might hear "Firefox, firefox, firefox" a few more times. And that might be all it takes for a few hundred more converts.
So when I paid $150 for XP Pro, that was for the CD and case? You can't license something to me after I just paid for it. Or send it to me in a case made of gold and diamond
Slashdot Mirror
That's true, to an extent. Some people are unredeemable pirates, and will never earn the studios a penny. Some people, for instance, might pirate because they missed an episode of 24 and want to watch the rest of the series, or to watch the prequel to an upcoming movie because the rental place is out of it. I'd argue that those people help the studio with their piracy (by watching the next episode of 24 after they missed one, or getting addicted to the show after seeing an episode or two over bittorrent. I'm saying that studios need to find a way to increase that kind of piracy (or not discourage it totally), while cutting down on the negative piracy. All I'm saying is that not all piracy is bad, and that the business model can be adapted to be harmed less and helped more by piracy.
Core 2 Duo desktop and laptop chips were formally announced in July (the 27th or so). Desktop chips (Conre) were launched then, and started shipping (with models coming out in serious numbers over the last two weeks). Notebook chips (Merom) were "launched" today, which means we can look at pretty benchmarks as Intel starts shipping them out to most OEMs. We will see the processors in computers at stores in a few weeks.
in fact, there's hasn't been any objective documentaries made, ever. the views of the filmmakers always shines through one way or another.
There's a massive difference between "filmmaker's view shining through" and "film created to make a point". I agree with you on the former, but we're discussing the latter here. No offense, but your point isn't really relevant (albeit likely accurate). What we're talking about here are "documentaries" designed to sell an idea. there exist documentaries that either attempt to tell both sides equally or just aren't out to sell you on something, but they're becoming more and more rare.
Sounds to me like they understand the net perfectly, because P2P networks as they're currently used *are* a threat to their livelihoods. Note that this isn't the fault of the technology, but the people using it. And the threat isn't all that big or serious, but it is there.
Not necessarily. There are some risks to P2P for content providers, but P2P can be helpful in some instances (getting you hooked on a show, like what the high piracy rate of "33" did for BSG). A model based around P2P could work even better. P2P might harm some business models (release a crappy movie, overhype it, and hope everyone sees it on week 1), but other business models survive.
The tendency to make biased documentaries is pretty old (relatively). See "Moore, Michael" or "Fox News", or anything like that. This is simply the extension of polarized politics to another field. It's not like "the other side" is anywhere near unbiased on the issue. Mainstream media just takes orders from corporate headquarters and assumes that filesharing is bad and costs them money.
My dad's a vet. We live in a relatively well-off county. The Humane Society has some sort of rebate for spayings and neuterings for poor families. The vet covers half, and the HS covers half (something like that). Anyhow, everyone tries (and generally suceeds) at playing the "I'm poor" game and going for the lower rate. These are people who live in 1.5-2 million dollar homes and drive up to the clinic in Hummers or Lexuses.
People won't deal with having to pay a "rich tax" if they find out about it. Not to mention that slashdotters will complain (with some merit) at having to provide their financial information just to get cable.
It's not the particular case people have an issue with, it's the principle. Volunteer hackers cracking people's systems for the FBI? What do you want to bet that we only saw this case because the guy was extra double guilty? I mean, if this gets written up as legal, then the RIAA can have people hack our computers to look for music. When we get to the point where we can't expect privacy anywhere on our computers, we're pretty screwed. Also, from the technical point of view, it'd be nice to be able to say "X, Y, and Z are hacking and wrong and can always be stopped" (where X,Y, and Z are hacking, keylogging, etc.), rather than being like "Hey, I'm ZoneAlarm. I see a problem. I guess I have to check with the FBI to see if this is legal hacking or not."
There's so many prior art examples of this it's just silly.
OK, so how do you/I/anyone go about emailing the USPTO to that effect?
There are a lot of browser-based tools in the workplace that need ActiveX. And everytime someone has a tool like that, they're stuck on Windows until the replace the tool. When you add up the cost to re-code a lot of your intraweb-based tools, and your customized Access databases (going to whatever OO.o uses and basic Perl/PHP/Javascript/etc), it quickly becomes cheaper to stick to Windows
OK, well, I mean I found out yesterday... Yes, an hour is obviously hyperbole, but folding@home is a darn good thing to be doing.
If I'm driving a Civic, and you a tractor-trailer, and we're on a two-lane road, and I swerve into your lane, is it your fault?
This isn't a planted story by Sony *at all*.
I found out yesterday that someone I knew last year died of liver cancer over the summer. She was 19. I think it's safe to say that there are plenty of people out there who don't give a flying fuck if Sony gets good press about this. If it brings us a cure to cancer a year, a day, an hour sooner, it's a damn fine thing. I just hope most PS3 owners find out about it, and maybe we can cure cancer. If a company makes an extra million or two in the process, good for them.
Some developers don't have it yet. Only WWDCers got the first build, and I think only paying ADC members can download it and later builds.
On the plus side, we'll get a bit more legal precedent and discussion about exactly what an IP address proves. Since 99% of RIAA cases settle out of court and about .5% are dropped (made up, quasi-accurate numbers), there haven't been many cases establishing how you get someone based on an IP address.
There are instances where obscure Star Force titles haven't been cracked - because it's too much work for little gain with smaller titles, but anything you or I have heard of in any form of mainstream game press has almost certainly been cracked. And it only takes one cracker to get it cracked for good.
I mean really, all SCO can do is be an ass to an IBM guy. I mean, they wouldn't need to pull something like this to ask remotely relevant questions, and since IBM isn't gonna settle to save this guy some embarassment, all SCO gets to do is what they always do: be petty, retarded dumbasses.
I'll wake you up when September ends.
SoaP cost $30 million to make. They'll make all their money back in the US box office (or close to it). Then there's the foreign box office (where this may not be remotely hot, but could bring in some cash). Then second-run movies, like college campuses, etc. I work at a college theater (head of ushering), and I'm expecting big crowds to Snakes when we get it (mid-October). That's a lot more money. Lastly, DVDs and DVD rentals. It'll make it's backers a lot of money. It'll have a better return on investment than a lot of other BIG MOVIE blockbusters.
Don't be too hasty there - you can bet your bottom dollar that whoever gets said ships to said planets will be as interested in mineral-heavy planets as they will be in living space. Not to mention that we may well be out hunting for hydrogen to burn (having exhausted our gas giants)
Um, I'm pretty sure the GE in 700GE stands for gigabit ethernet. It's got several ports of them.
So how come many scientists think the Earth-Moon system is 4.5bn years old? Maybe they just haven't done the math.
Or maybe they're just way smarter than you?
Why preach to the choir?
In theory, controversial topic=more page views=more adclicks.
Only problem there is that the Goa'uld might get mad.
But he'd get along with the Orii...
This makes the local news (and maybe gets picked up somewhere), and a few pissed off IE6 users might hear "Firefox, firefox, firefox" a few more times. And that might be all it takes for a few hundred more converts.
So when I paid $150 for XP Pro, that was for the CD and case? You can't license something to me after I just paid for it. Or send it to me in a case made of gold and diamond