The sheriff is investigating the Superior Court, and the servers may have emails on them that he hasn't been able to get access to legally through the appellate courts. So it's not a CYA, it's a fishing expedition.
Except that Viacom already provides a lot of that programming online for free, and what Viacom doesn't provide can easily be found through less-official sources - a fact which TWC has been gleefully pointing out for the past day or so. TWC can live without Viacom's content by charging more for access to bandwidth, which can in turn be used to access the content. Viacom, OTOH, doesn't get nearly as much revenue from online eyeballs as it does from eyeballs watching the TV. Their choices are to start charging the end user for viewing online content (good luck with that) or to take a big hit in their revenue stream when TWC is no longer paying them to carry their channels.
My bedroom is messy, but my office is tidy. The only thing hanging on my wall in either location is a clock. My room contains art supplies, movie tickets, travel memorabilia, laundry baskets, and a calendar. It is well-lit and not at all colorful, but contains neither flags nor sports emblems. Does this make me a centrist, or a schizophrenic?
I must report you to the analogy police. This is more like two people sitting in a restaurant speaking at normal volume or lower. You could hear what they are saying if you move closer. If you do so, are you behaving ethically?
When I travel, I make sure to have my liquids in 3 oz or smaller bottles, in my 1 qt Ziploc bag. I can fit maybe 4-5 items in the bag, for a total of 12-15 oz of liquid. I usually travel with my husband and two small children, each of whom are also allowed a similar amount of liquid, in the same format. Total amount of liquid that our party is bringing on the plane: 48-60 oz. But they won't let me bring an unopened 16 oz bottle of water through security - or, heaven forbid, a 12 oz sippy cup of juice for my daughter.
Wow, thanks for the tip, IIAA! Now I know where to go for all my bootleg movies, pirated software and tiny microchips that allow me to bypass copyright protections.
I disagree with your premise. I downloaded quite a bit of music from the original Napster and clones back in the day, but when iTunes came online I started buying music from them, even replacing some of my previous downloads. Their little $0.99 guilt tax is low enough that I'm willing to pay it in order to have legal copies of songs I like.
As my nickname indicates, I'm not a techie - I don't know if this makes me representative of a "large portion of the buying public." I'm not saying that I currently download movies using BT, but I will say this: if the studios would make movies available to me online legally, for a reasonable price, with good quality, and without DRM, they would make more money from my purchases than they currently do.
But I think we all know that's not going to happen anytime soon.
I have two children, two part-time jobs, and I am working on my Master's degree in English literature. I make the time to satisfy my intellectual curiosity by pursuing my education and by frequenting forums like/. My time, energy and mental capacity are not luxuries, they are choices. That having been said, I often feel a certain aura of elitism emanating from the "usual crowd" here. Just because I'm not obssessive about the same things you are obssessive about does not mean that my pursuits are less or more worthy than yours; they're just different. http://tavesblog.blogspot.com/
Slashdot Mirror
The sheriff is investigating the Superior Court, and the servers may have emails on them that he hasn't been able to get access to legally through the appellate courts. So it's not a CYA, it's a fishing expedition.
In other words, Murdoch wants something of value (the subscribers' demographic information) for free. Ironic.
Except that Viacom already provides a lot of that programming online for free, and what Viacom doesn't provide can easily be found through less-official sources - a fact which TWC has been gleefully pointing out for the past day or so. TWC can live without Viacom's content by charging more for access to bandwidth, which can in turn be used to access the content. Viacom, OTOH, doesn't get nearly as much revenue from online eyeballs as it does from eyeballs watching the TV. Their choices are to start charging the end user for viewing online content (good luck with that) or to take a big hit in their revenue stream when TWC is no longer paying them to carry their channels.
Structural ambiguity ftw.
My bedroom is messy, but my office is tidy. The only thing hanging on my wall in either location is a clock. My room contains art supplies, movie tickets, travel memorabilia, laundry baskets, and a calendar. It is well-lit and not at all colorful, but contains neither flags nor sports emblems. Does this make me a centrist, or a schizophrenic?
Not a big fan of the Star Wars prequels, then?
If she'd been smart enough to use encryption, she'd have been smart enough not to use such an obvious password, obvious security question, etc.
I must report you to the analogy police. This is more like two people sitting in a restaurant speaking at normal volume or lower. You could hear what they are saying if you move closer. If you do so, are you behaving ethically?
Hey, maybe this time they'll find a full deck to play with.
"HOPEFULLY a price reduction" - your hope is in vain.
When I travel, I make sure to have my liquids in 3 oz or smaller bottles, in my 1 qt Ziploc bag. I can fit maybe 4-5 items in the bag, for a total of 12-15 oz of liquid. I usually travel with my husband and two small children, each of whom are also allowed a similar amount of liquid, in the same format. Total amount of liquid that our party is bringing on the plane: 48-60 oz. But they won't let me bring an unopened 16 oz bottle of water through security - or, heaven forbid, a 12 oz sippy cup of juice for my daughter.
And yet I had no idea that they were doing this. OTOH, my university library has a Google book search box on their front page.
For the record, there is now a vaccine for varicella (chickenpox) and they are already requiring it in some areas before children can start school.
Wow, thanks for the tip, IIAA! Now I know where to go for all my bootleg movies, pirated software and tiny microchips that allow me to bypass copyright protections.
I disagree with your premise. I downloaded quite a bit of music from the original Napster and clones back in the day, but when iTunes came online I started buying music from them, even replacing some of my previous downloads. Their little $0.99 guilt tax is low enough that I'm willing to pay it in order to have legal copies of songs I like.
As my nickname indicates, I'm not a techie - I don't know if this makes me representative of a "large portion of the buying public." I'm not saying that I currently download movies using BT, but I will say this: if the studios would make movies available to me online legally, for a reasonable price, with good quality, and without DRM, they would make more money from my purchases than they currently do.
But I think we all know that's not going to happen anytime soon.
I have two children, two part-time jobs, and I am working on my Master's degree in English literature. I make the time to satisfy my intellectual curiosity by pursuing my education and by frequenting forums like /. My time, energy and mental capacity are not luxuries, they are choices. That having been said, I often feel a certain aura of elitism emanating from the "usual crowd" here. Just because I'm not obssessive about the same things you are obssessive about does not mean that my pursuits are less or more worthy than yours; they're just different.
http://tavesblog.blogspot.com/
You forgot step #4, "profit."