I don't know about the laws in the US (IANAL) but in Canada for a contract to be enforcable it must not pertain to illegal elements.
So if fair use is legislated, then not allowing fair use would violate that law, and make the contract (agreement) or perhaps that one segment of the agreement unenforcable within the courts.
Of course, enforcement is one thing, and the DCA is hitting the equipment manufacturers who don't want to rock the boat in most cases. I'll bet Samsung is the only company to have a go at getting around this problem.
Pay your bills, deadbeats.
Seriously.
If IBM owed the government money, would the government let them turn it into a charitable donation? I don't think so. Ask Willie Nelson.
IBM is IBM, and 5 Million is coffee money for them, but still. Is there still a debtor's prison.
Do the right thing. You have the product, the fact that you lost it proves that your deadbeats and stupid, not just deadbeats. wow.
1 more time.
Pay your bills.
There is always the implication when saying "by a woman", of "for a woman".
It's like saying that they are not as capable as men are.
If I was a woman, it would piss me off that someone says to me "by a woman" because that is implying that {women are} being held to a separate (and under the "for" concept, a lesser) standard, which should not be the case.
why can't this person be the 4th longest flight, or the 10th longest flight or the longest flight, whatever her ranking among everybody is.
I know if I was graduating from school I would rather be X position in my class, rather than Y position in my little subgroup, even if X > Y.
Have you ever brought back a CD to a store that is maybe 2 or 3 years old and told them it was broken?
Do they take it back and give you (the same) cd back?
If what we are paying for is the content solely, then shouldn't they?
I think it would make the whole industry more credible if they were willing to do that.
Why should I have to pay a second time for content that I already paid for.
Also, if I have it on tape, shouldn't I be able to trade it in for CD, and same with VHS and DVD? Pay a small fee for the upgraded quality of the content, but still, I own the movie, so why do I have to buy it again?
No I get that. I have a couple of cars that don't see snow. And a truck that lives in the snow.
The CBC commented that the "average" user should be using some flavour of Unix.
I have a machine with Linux installed. I have a MacMini with OS X on it. Just so I can see it. My main PC has Windows XP. I like playing with Linux, and I like playing with OS X. But I'm not the average user, and neither are most/.ers. That is why I think the article is misdirected.
I remember reading/hearing about one of the ancient Greek or Roman societies where when one was appointed (selected) to the senate (or whatever governing body was in power at the time) all the assets of said appointee were liquidated, and the appointee would get back a % of their assets that matched how the wealth of the nation was doing as whole. Could be more could be less. Interesting concept, but hardly applicable in our society.
So I agree with you, but I'm sure you realize as I do that it is completely unworkable.
I think I got your point.
I am completely aware that there are many people in the government who put their own needs above those of the government (i.e. society).
Petty burocracy and standing behind the "union mentality" are definitely problems that we have with government.
The only way to solve these issues is to have the government run by a completely atonomous computer. I know, that doesn't sound very appealing either.
But here's the thing. If no one allowed the government to do their job, our world would not be a good place. Same with the police. They aren't perfect, or even close to perfect, but until we all move to Utopia, Indiana, (I don't actually know if there is a Utopia, Indiana) we are stuck with the best that we have.
Anything run by people is inherantly flawed because people are inherantly flawed, but we have to try to follow the rules and work within the system.
Unfortunately, the price of the great freedoms that we enjoy here in North America/Europe is that some people will take advantage of the system for their own personal gain. I don't see the government people taking advantage any different than the perpetual welfare recipients who never work to better themselves. It's different sides of the same coin.
So, my diluted point is that we don't have a perfect system, and there are jerks and users everywhere, but if as many people as possible follow the system, we can figure out who is trying to cheat the rest of us, and drag them out to the back of the restaurant and have them beaten.:)
Because we all know that people who work for the government or police are perfect and can never be corrupt or just jerks.
I know that the government is full of inept, incompetent and quite likely corrupt individuals. Same with the police. But still, both those agencies have a job to do, which is theoretically to make life safer and better for the majority of people.
If we want a complete breakdown of society fine, lets find the off switch, but realistically, you have to deal with the corruption, just like you have to deal with a jerk boss.
It doesn't mean the overall concept isn't good, and deserves our support.
I'm writing from Canada.
I cannot imagine that opposing political views would be cause for dismissal.
Of course, an employer can always manufacture reasons to fire someone if they want, but hey that's life.
TRW is a pseudo I have used for best part of 25 years. To many people it identifies me pretty well.
I'm surprised nobody has brought up the identity theft argument yet, but there we go.
I think that there is a difference between privacy to the average internet user, and to police/government agencies.
Sure, I don't want average joe idiot getting hold of my name here on/. and having him start calling my house. I don't give out my home phone number for that exact reason.
But privacy against the police or government can (in most cases) only be for less than virtuous reasons. Now buddy up above in China who claimed to be studying democratic groups is an exception, I suppose although, if he is acting against his government, how is that different than somebody else acting against their government. An issue for another day, I suppose.
I know that freedom is important, but it has to be weighed against "the common good". For instance, school is a right. If someone has a mono, they should not be allowed their right to education until they are no longer infectious. It is just better for everybody, it seems to me.
Thank you for your interesting comments. It's nice to see some people aren't rabid psychos and can offer some useful information.
I really don't have any comments for the first paragraph. Politics is always a contentious issue, and if you are working for someone who is in the "other camp" and they fire you for your views, then you would have recourse.
I think that the world is a much less private place than it use to be. This is due primarily to technology, and it is impossible to have one without the other in most cases. I'm not saying good or bad, just different.
As for the battered wife analogy, I cannot sympathize enough with someone in that situation. However, she should be running to a shelter and a lawyer, not surfing the net. In any case, an anonymous proxy would not protect her from the husband looking on the PC or putting a key-logger on the system.
Avoiding oppression is a lofty goal truly, but do you think it's realistic? The government is the least of your worries, I would be more concerned with fellow man. There is more oppression there than in the government I think.
I don't care if the government listens to what I say on the phone. It's their right to be as bored by my conversations as I am.
I am pretty sure that nothing I do is so important that I need to be monitored by the government. However, if you disagree, please feel free to come over here and follow me around.
The truth is, if your not doing something illegal, you aren't very interesting to the police or the government.
There are just too many people in the world for anyone to monitor them all.
I'm not part of the problem.
Thank you for backing up your insult with specifics or examples.
Is all of what I said rubbish? Of course you are entitled to your opinion, however, to me, you are incorrect.
ha, good point.
Not married, never been.
It's a sucker bet for sure.
I know lots of people will disagree, and that's fine. But for me, pass.
I think it is the responsibility of both parties, but the point I was making is that if one of the parties doesn't want the other party doing something, then offer an alternative to the undesired action. I guess that's compromise.
I think in most cases it's because they are embarrassed in what they are doing.
So if you are doing something that you don't want people to know you are doing, my question is, what the hell is wrong with you?
If your married, and your wife doesn't want you looking at porn, then she should offer alternatives or shut up.
If your a pedophile, then I hope you get arrested, because that is what you deserve.
Why do people do things anonymously that they wouldn't do if their name was stamped on it? I think the world would be a lot better place if everyone took responsibility for what they said and what they did.
It's like Hawkeye Pierce said, "there should be a rule in war that before you kill somebody you have to get to know them.".
In the States, you can start a company, and with hard work make a success for yourself and your family?
It's a shame that the US has lost the "drive" it had to succeed. Now everybody wants things handed to them.
No longer competitive in the world environment, (some) Americans now want the corporations of the world to hold their hand and make everything better.
The problem is, people like that aren't part of the solution, they are part of the problem. They don't want to work, they want it handed to them.
When I started my company, I worked 60 or 70 hours a week for $20,000 a year. I did this for five years before it started to succeed. I took risks, I worked hard, I got lucky. (Not as lucky as Bill Gates, but lucky, all the same.)
Quit complaining about the other guy and start competing. Take that lower paying job to get in with the company and work hard, show your skill and get promoted.
Or get a job, watch porn at work, get fired, and sue the company for wrongful dismissal. It's the NEW American way.
hahaha why don't you learn how to spell.
As for your opinion, it just couldn't matter less.
I'll tell you what, lets compare our success in life, and business.
If you're doing better than me, I'll concede your point. If not, well, then whatever.
Since you obviously have no real point to make, other than insult me, I'll consider the source irrelevent to the discussion at hand.
Why can't there be a law like this...
If you use any media to attempt to meet a minor for nefarious purposes, then you are guilty of gross criminal indecency.
Leave it to the courts to decide what nefarious means, it's a good litmus test.
hun? why not.
The all the teachers and people doing good work have no reason to get screwed over, and the pedophiles can be put in jail. "oh Mr. Convict, Did we mention Jim was a pedophile?" Have fun in general population. You'll get everything you deserve.
Slashdot Mirror
So if fair use is legislated, then not allowing fair use would violate that law, and make the contract (agreement) or perhaps that one segment of the agreement unenforcable within the courts.
Of course, enforcement is one thing, and the DCA is hitting the equipment manufacturers who don't want to rock the boat in most cases. I'll bet Samsung is the only company to have a go at getting around this problem.
Pay your bills, deadbeats. Seriously. If IBM owed the government money, would the government let them turn it into a charitable donation? I don't think so. Ask Willie Nelson. IBM is IBM, and 5 Million is coffee money for them, but still. Is there still a debtor's prison. Do the right thing. You have the product, the fact that you lost it proves that your deadbeats and stupid, not just deadbeats. wow. 1 more time. Pay your bills.
There is always the implication when saying "by a woman", of "for a woman".
It's like saying that they are not as capable as men are.
If I was a woman, it would piss me off that someone says to me "by a woman" because that is implying that {women are} being held to a separate (and under the "for" concept, a lesser) standard, which should not be the case.
why can't this person be the 4th longest flight, or the 10th longest flight or the longest flight, whatever her ranking among everybody is.
I know if I was graduating from school I would rather be X position in my class, rather than Y position in my little subgroup, even if X > Y.
Of course, it's not really realistic.
How about this scenario. Some freak asaults your 5 year old daughter. He leaves her emotionally and physically scarred for life.
What is a suitable punishement for this? I dare you to come up with one. I'm not sure that death is enough.
I guess my point is, if you do something really bad to someone (like ruin their life) then you should expect the same to happen to you.
Do they take it back and give you (the same) cd back?
If what we are paying for is the content solely, then shouldn't they?
I think it would make the whole industry more credible if they were willing to do that.
Why should I have to pay a second time for content that I already paid for.
Also, if I have it on tape, shouldn't I be able to trade it in for CD, and same with VHS and DVD? Pay a small fee for the upgraded quality of the content, but still, I own the movie, so why do I have to buy it again?
The CBC commented that the "average" user should be using some flavour of Unix.
I have a machine with Linux installed. I have a MacMini with OS X on it. Just so I can see it. My main PC has Windows XP. I like playing with Linux, and I like playing with OS X. But I'm not the average user, and neither are most /.ers. That is why I think the article is misdirected.
Well, that's kind of like saying, "well except for driving [in snow] the car is very useful".
I use in snow because some people never drive in snow or play games on their computer. But most people do at some point.
So it seems to me that alternate OSs for work are good, and for home, for the most part, are bad.
So would making a politician live up to his/her campaign promises.
He with the gold makes the rules.
That's human nature I think.
I remember reading/hearing about one of the ancient Greek or Roman societies where when one was appointed (selected) to the senate (or whatever governing body was in power at the time) all the assets of said appointee were liquidated, and the appointee would get back a % of their assets that matched how the wealth of the nation was doing as whole. Could be more could be less. Interesting concept, but hardly applicable in our society.
So I agree with you, but I'm sure you realize as I do that it is completely unworkable.
I think I got your point. I am completely aware that there are many people in the government who put their own needs above those of the government (i.e. society). Petty burocracy and standing behind the "union mentality" are definitely problems that we have with government. The only way to solve these issues is to have the government run by a completely atonomous computer. I know, that doesn't sound very appealing either. But here's the thing. If no one allowed the government to do their job, our world would not be a good place. Same with the police. They aren't perfect, or even close to perfect, but until we all move to Utopia, Indiana, (I don't actually know if there is a Utopia, Indiana) we are stuck with the best that we have. Anything run by people is inherantly flawed because people are inherantly flawed, but we have to try to follow the rules and work within the system. Unfortunately, the price of the great freedoms that we enjoy here in North America/Europe is that some people will take advantage of the system for their own personal gain. I don't see the government people taking advantage any different than the perpetual welfare recipients who never work to better themselves. It's different sides of the same coin. So, my diluted point is that we don't have a perfect system, and there are jerks and users everywhere, but if as many people as possible follow the system, we can figure out who is trying to cheat the rest of us, and drag them out to the back of the restaurant and have them beaten. :)
I know that the government is full of inept, incompetent and quite likely corrupt individuals. Same with the police. But still, both those agencies have a job to do, which is theoretically to make life safer and better for the majority of people.
If we want a complete breakdown of society fine, lets find the off switch, but realistically, you have to deal with the corruption, just like you have to deal with a jerk boss.
It doesn't mean the overall concept isn't good, and deserves our support.
I'm writing from Canada. I cannot imagine that opposing political views would be cause for dismissal. Of course, an employer can always manufacture reasons to fire someone if they want, but hey that's life.
I'm surprised nobody has brought up the identity theft argument yet, but there we go.
I think that there is a difference between privacy to the average internet user, and to police/government agencies.
Sure, I don't want average joe idiot getting hold of my name here on /. and having him start calling my house. I don't give out my home phone number for that exact reason.
But privacy against the police or government can (in most cases) only be for less than virtuous reasons. Now buddy up above in China who claimed to be studying democratic groups is an exception, I suppose although, if he is acting against his government, how is that different than somebody else acting against their government. An issue for another day, I suppose.
I know that freedom is important, but it has to be weighed against "the common good". For instance, school is a right. If someone has a mono, they should not be allowed their right to education until they are no longer infectious. It is just better for everybody, it seems to me.
Thank you for your interesting comments. It's nice to see some people aren't rabid psychos and can offer some useful information. I really don't have any comments for the first paragraph. Politics is always a contentious issue, and if you are working for someone who is in the "other camp" and they fire you for your views, then you would have recourse. I think that the world is a much less private place than it use to be. This is due primarily to technology, and it is impossible to have one without the other in most cases. I'm not saying good or bad, just different. As for the battered wife analogy, I cannot sympathize enough with someone in that situation. However, she should be running to a shelter and a lawyer, not surfing the net. In any case, an anonymous proxy would not protect her from the husband looking on the PC or putting a key-logger on the system. Avoiding oppression is a lofty goal truly, but do you think it's realistic? The government is the least of your worries, I would be more concerned with fellow man. There is more oppression there than in the government I think.
I don't care if the government listens to what I say on the phone. It's their right to be as bored by my conversations as I am. I am pretty sure that nothing I do is so important that I need to be monitored by the government. However, if you disagree, please feel free to come over here and follow me around. The truth is, if your not doing something illegal, you aren't very interesting to the police or the government. There are just too many people in the world for anyone to monitor them all.
I'm not part of the problem. Thank you for backing up your insult with specifics or examples. Is all of what I said rubbish? Of course you are entitled to your opinion, however, to me, you are incorrect.
ha, good point. Not married, never been. It's a sucker bet for sure. I know lots of people will disagree, and that's fine. But for me, pass. I think it is the responsibility of both parties, but the point I was making is that if one of the parties doesn't want the other party doing something, then offer an alternative to the undesired action. I guess that's compromise.
I think in most cases it's because they are embarrassed in what they are doing.
So if you are doing something that you don't want people to know you are doing, my question is, what the hell is wrong with you?
If your married, and your wife doesn't want you looking at porn, then she should offer alternatives or shut up.
If your a pedophile, then I hope you get arrested, because that is what you deserve.
Why do people do things anonymously that they wouldn't do if their name was stamped on it? I think the world would be a lot better place if everyone took responsibility for what they said and what they did.
It's like Hawkeye Pierce said, "there should be a rule in war that before you kill somebody you have to get to know them.".
We make money the old fashioned way. We sue.
In the States, you can start a company, and with hard work make a success for yourself and your family?
It's a shame that the US has lost the "drive" it had to succeed. Now everybody wants things handed to them.
No longer competitive in the world environment, (some) Americans now want the corporations of the world to hold their hand and make everything better.
The problem is, people like that aren't part of the solution, they are part of the problem. They don't want to work, they want it handed to them.
When I started my company, I worked 60 or 70 hours a week for $20,000 a year. I did this for five years before it started to succeed. I took risks, I worked hard, I got lucky. (Not as lucky as Bill Gates, but lucky, all the same.)
Quit complaining about the other guy and start competing. Take that lower paying job to get in with the company and work hard, show your skill and get promoted.
Or get a job, watch porn at work, get fired, and sue the company for wrongful dismissal. It's the NEW American way.
The funny part is, a quick jump to the business vision website didn't even mention anything about Vista.
Anyway, a (not so quick) restore, and things are back where they were before.
It also broke too much of my hardware, including the MS finger print reader and my printer, so, unfortunately, no go for me.
I thought norweigan death metal was the hardest metal.
hahaha why don't you learn how to spell. As for your opinion, it just couldn't matter less. I'll tell you what, lets compare our success in life, and business. If you're doing better than me, I'll concede your point. If not, well, then whatever. Since you obviously have no real point to make, other than insult me, I'll consider the source irrelevent to the discussion at hand.
Isn't that what lobbying is all about?
It's called deal making. If Intel offered me cash to use their CPUs only, I would take it.
It's called a rebate.
Why can't there be a law like this... If you use any media to attempt to meet a minor for nefarious purposes, then you are guilty of gross criminal indecency. Leave it to the courts to decide what nefarious means, it's a good litmus test. hun? why not. The all the teachers and people doing good work have no reason to get screwed over, and the pedophiles can be put in jail. "oh Mr. Convict, Did we mention Jim was a pedophile?" Have fun in general population. You'll get everything you deserve.