Piratebay clearly doesn't host any copyright materials, their role is the same as google's, that of a search engine. They don't cash any checks. Aren't they all essentially volunteers?
No, they aren't just like Google, and yes, they do gain financially. Their primary reason for existence is to point to illegal copies of copyrighted works, hence the name "Pirate Bay". They don't try to hide their purpose -- they flaunt it. Google is a generic search engine.
As for money, they are very secretive about their operating costs and revenue. They get money in from advertisements. On a site as big as theirs, do you seriously think they don't come out ahead? Why all the secrecy?
"Investigations by some journalists suggest that the site is making money on a level that far exceeds its operating costs. This leads some to opine that the Pirate Bay is more engaged in making profit than supporting people's rights.[19][20][21] Operators of the site have insisted that these allegations are not true, stating, "It's not free to operate a Web site on this scale," and, "If we were making lots of money I wouldn't be working late at the office tonight, I'd be sitting on a beach somewhere, working on my tan."[22] In response to claims of annual revenue exceeding $3 million made by the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI), Peter Sunde argues that the site's high bandwidth, power, and hardware costs eliminate the potential for profit. The Pirate Bay, he says, may ultimately be operating at a loss.[23]. No figures have been publicly released by Pirate Bay, however, to support these claims."
Now, Net Neutrality is essentially a political (and economical) debate, and has nothing to do with the first category (technical constraints). Cutting off Intercage/Atrivo seems to me like belonging to the first category: they were actively disrupting the Net on the technical level, and they had to go. IMHO.
There is no clear dividing line. Spam is largely a social problem with some technical consequences. People don't like receiving spam (social), and the load causes problems for administrators (technical). Same with network neutrality: A few people running BitTorrent can ruin network utility for everybody else on the last mile. It's a technical problem to handle the traffic in a way that society perceives as fair.
I agree with all of that. I just wanted to note that companies like IBM still have a large stake in proprietary software. I think some zealots miss this point (not you, in particular, but people like QuantumG for sure).
IBM doesn't send zillions of patches to Linus out of altruism. They send patches because they want Linux to behave better and have the features they want so they can ship more servers.
IBM doesn't just sell servers -- they also sell proprietary software like DB/2 for big bucks. What IBM is afraid of is a Microsoft monoculture where "nobody got fired for buying Microsoft", you know the slogan that used to be applied to IBM.
Since there is now competition, it would seem logical for the price of this commercial software to drop - but to avoid that, we apparently designed a whole college course on how to break all the rules and play unfair.
There aren't any rules against trying to lock-in your customers, unless you are considered to have a monopoly position. This has been the game since forever, and it's even hard to call it unfair when that's the rules everybody plays by. The only notable thing in all of this is that a college course is actually teaching real-world business.
Of course, that's not the only way to play the game. You could try playing nice and competing on openness and quality.
I threw away another couple mod points to write this:/
So you gamed the system by whining about it to get more people to mod you up, instead of letting your post stand on its own merits. Did you break the rules or play unfairly?
The physical media is nice because it's essentially an external backup.
Don't you have other files on your computer that you backup? Amazon just gives you mp3 files -- you can back them up or transfer them to other machines as you wish.
I wouldn't blame the labels. If the band could produce a quality album full of great songs they would. The fact is even talented bands usually only have a few worthwhile songs at most on an album. Creating good music is hard.
But it's helpful to have leaders tell us all how best to go about it, especially in novel situations. That would be part of leading. And I'd like them to remind everybody, especially during times of crisis, that public service is valuable and welcome.
I agree, I felt the same way after 9/11, and many Americans did. However, Bush was right, as crass and disappointing as "go shopping" sounds. What could the average American do after 9/11?
If the answer was a generic "serve your community", that's an even emptier answer than "go shopping". At least the shopping answer was a nudge to Americans to go on about their lives and keep the economy going.
Almost all of them had to go to work for former slave owners, doing the same kinds of things they'd done before, only now they were responsible for their own debts and bills, providing food and housing and whatnot for themselves and their children.
I don't understand this. Why wouldn't the former slave owner agree to the same arrangements as before? He's getting essentially slave labor in a free market (he's just paying room and board as he did before). The only thing different is that as more opportunities opened up the virtual slave would be free to renegotiate or move on.
Typical flamebait and screechy politics, calling people you disagree with idiots and liars. You really are blinded by partisanship.
The surge escalation has failed. [...] That was a means to an end, to create a political opportunity that was totally squandered.
This is highly debatable. Violence at least has decreased. This is a much better outcome than the situation beforehand or an all out civil war. There is still time for the Iraqi government to coalesce. The opportunity is still there, at least. You cannot call the surge a complete success or a complete failure.
Yeah, and then he totally ignored that most economists are Democrats.
What are you talking about? It was part of the press release and also mentioned explicitly in his opinion piece. Oh I see, you want him to parade it as a conclusive...
Because people who understand the economy vote for Democrats.
That doesn't mean much, if anything. People in academia in general our Democrats. Just because somebody chooses to study the economy doesn't mean that's the only issue they care about. What I find interesting is that 27% are Independents, and among them Obama has the edge -- and I do stress edge.
And there we have the basic evidence of Scott Adams idiocy. Or rather, his lying. Obama might be raising Adams' taxes, if he makes over $250,000 a year. He's almost certainly not going to raise yours.
What did Adams lie about, as you so boldy stated? Yes, he probably does make over $250,000 a year, and will be taxed more under Obama. He was only speaking for himself, and not others.
He's as scared of McCain as he is of Obama, because though he believes McCain won't tax him (but the country would fall apart, an expensive proposition even for a cartoonist who has to live in it), because McCain is boring. Which means he won't be a good cartoon subject.
I didn't realize that Scott Adams made a lot of money at political satire. I thought he still runs his Dilbert cartoon, making fun of the workplace. Maybe he's just honestly afraid that McCain really is too old for the job. I think even McCain supporters are worried about his age. He looked fit enough 8 years ago when he ran. He doesn't anymore.
I was working with the Clinton-Gore '92 online campaign right at the start of the Web and later with the Whitehouse. They saw the opportunity to disintermediate the mainstream press, what W. has called 'the filter'.
How sad then that the Clinton administration was behind the Clipper chip.
BUT if I want a mixed album of certain songs, well that leads to $15-20.
Listen here, sonny. Back in my day I paid $17 dollars for a CD to get two songs I liked, and if I was lucky it contained a hidden gem and another song or two that was ok. The thought of getting 10 songs that I really liked on an album was unthinkable!
Well, it's ok. Times change and bits are flying around the Internet. The world will shake out this copyright business, for better or for worse. Just offering some perspective:)
Depends on where you live, but most people travel somewhat over the speed limit. You've already stated that people zip by you on the left and the right as you keep to the limit. I'd guess you are in the minority.
sometimes a person who slashes through the space ahead of you really needs to get someplace quick and ran out of time.
Endangering traffic because you ran late is not ok. Furthermore, on busy highways there's always some asshole who will cut in front of you if you leave a space.
So many assertions, all based on people's political philosophy and not on data!
So you follow that by spewing your own political philosophy without data as universal truth? The funny thing is the post you replied to was talking about data.
"Which is too bad, as she's on Ubuntu and feels left out..."
You cared enough to mention this. Mock Windows all you want, these "you can't have it because you don't run Windows" items add up. Google fucked up -- they should have made it cross-platform from the beginning.
Funny how you manage to contradict yourself when comparing the beginning and end of your post:
Truth is, I don't really care if Chrome runs under Linux or not. [...] Even my mother-in-law asked me about Chrome. Which is too bad, as she's on Ubuntu and feels left out...
Sorry all you Ubuntu adopters. Did you really believe the hype? You should go back to Windows. Make sure to tell your friends about your disappointing experience.
"we're not fight to take away firefox's market share, we're fighting to take away IE's market share"
Look at it in that light, and it makes sense not to make it for osx and linux.
That's a short-sighted view. Microsoft's dominance, whether it's IE or Office, is based on their Windows monopoly. If you want to slay the beast, you can't do it by cutting off tentacles that regrow. Just look at IE 6 -> 7 -> 8. IE already has or is gaining tabs, processes, and privacy/security enhancing features.
Google perpetuated the Windows monopoly by designating the other platforms as second-class citizens. "Hey, we wrote some really cool software! Oh, and it's Windows only, and will remain so for a long time to come."
Of all companies, Google should have taken the time to write it cross-platform from the start. It probably would have cost them 10%-20% overhead initially, but saved a bunch down the road.
Slashdot Mirror
Piratebay clearly doesn't host any copyright materials, their role is the same as google's, that of a search engine. They don't cash any checks. Aren't they all essentially volunteers?
No, they aren't just like Google, and yes, they do gain financially. Their primary reason for existence is to point to illegal copies of copyrighted works, hence the name "Pirate Bay". They don't try to hide their purpose -- they flaunt it. Google is a generic search engine.
As for money, they are very secretive about their operating costs and revenue. They get money in from advertisements. On a site as big as theirs, do you seriously think they don't come out ahead? Why all the secrecy?
From Wikipedia:
"Investigations by some journalists suggest that the site is making money on a level that far exceeds its operating costs. This leads some to opine that the Pirate Bay is more engaged in making profit than supporting people's rights.[19][20][21] Operators of the site have insisted that these allegations are not true, stating, "It's not free to operate a Web site on this scale," and, "If we were making lots of money I wouldn't be working late at the office tonight, I'd be sitting on a beach somewhere, working on my tan."[22] In response to claims of annual revenue exceeding $3 million made by the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI), Peter Sunde argues that the site's high bandwidth, power, and hardware costs eliminate the potential for profit. The Pirate Bay, he says, may ultimately be operating at a loss.[23]. No figures have been publicly released by Pirate Bay, however, to support these claims."
Now, Net Neutrality is essentially a political (and economical) debate, and has nothing to do with the first category (technical constraints). Cutting off Intercage/Atrivo seems to me like belonging to the first category: they were actively disrupting the Net on the technical level, and they had to go. IMHO.
There is no clear dividing line. Spam is largely a social problem with some technical consequences. People don't like receiving spam (social), and the load causes problems for administrators (technical). Same with network neutrality: A few people running BitTorrent can ruin network utility for everybody else on the last mile. It's a technical problem to handle the traffic in a way that society perceives as fair.
I agree with all of that. I just wanted to note that companies like IBM still have a large stake in proprietary software. I think some zealots miss this point (not you, in particular, but people like QuantumG for sure).
IBM doesn't send zillions of patches to Linus out of altruism. They send patches because they want Linux to behave better and have the features they want so they can ship more servers.
IBM doesn't just sell servers -- they also sell proprietary software like DB/2 for big bucks. What IBM is afraid of is a Microsoft monoculture where "nobody got fired for buying Microsoft", you know the slogan that used to be applied to IBM.
Since there is now competition, it would seem logical for the price of this commercial software to drop - but to avoid that, we apparently designed a whole college course on how to break all the rules and play unfair.
There aren't any rules against trying to lock-in your customers, unless you are considered to have a monopoly position. This has been the game since forever, and it's even hard to call it unfair when that's the rules everybody plays by. The only notable thing in all of this is that a college course is actually teaching real-world business.
Of course, that's not the only way to play the game. You could try playing nice and competing on openness and quality.
I threw away another couple mod points to write this :/
So you gamed the system by whining about it to get more people to mod you up, instead of letting your post stand on its own merits. Did you break the rules or play unfairly?
The physical media is nice because it's essentially an external backup.
Don't you have other files on your computer that you backup? Amazon just gives you mp3 files -- you can back them up or transfer them to other machines as you wish.
I wouldn't blame the labels. If the band could produce a quality album full of great songs they would. The fact is even talented bands usually only have a few worthwhile songs at most on an album. Creating good music is hard.
But he says them eloquently.
Too eloquent, bordering on effeminate. Mildly entertaining, anyways.
But it's helpful to have leaders tell us all how best to go about it, especially in novel situations. That would be part of leading. And I'd like them to remind everybody, especially during times of crisis, that public service is valuable and welcome.
I agree, I felt the same way after 9/11, and many Americans did. However, Bush was right, as crass and disappointing as "go shopping" sounds. What could the average American do after 9/11?
If the answer was a generic "serve your community", that's an even emptier answer than "go shopping". At least the shopping answer was a nudge to Americans to go on about their lives and keep the economy going.
Almost all of them had to go to work for former slave owners, doing the same kinds of things they'd done before, only now they were responsible for their own debts and bills, providing food and housing and whatnot for themselves and their children.
I don't understand this. Why wouldn't the former slave owner agree to the same arrangements as before? He's getting essentially slave labor in a free market (he's just paying room and board as he did before). The only thing different is that as more opportunities opened up the virtual slave would be free to renegotiate or move on.
Scott Adams is an idiot.
Typical flamebait and screechy politics, calling people you disagree with idiots and liars. You really are blinded by partisanship.
The surge escalation has failed. [...] That was a means to an end, to create a political opportunity that was totally squandered.
This is highly debatable. Violence at least has decreased. This is a much better outcome than the situation beforehand or an all out civil war. There is still time for the Iraqi government to coalesce. The opportunity is still there, at least. You cannot call the surge a complete success or a complete failure.
Yeah, and then he totally ignored that most economists are Democrats.
What are you talking about? It was part of the press release and also mentioned explicitly in his opinion piece. Oh I see, you want him to parade it as a conclusive...
Because people who understand the economy vote for Democrats.
That doesn't mean much, if anything. People in academia in general our Democrats. Just because somebody chooses to study the economy doesn't mean that's the only issue they care about. What I find interesting is that 27% are Independents, and among them Obama has the edge -- and I do stress edge.
And there we have the basic evidence of Scott Adams idiocy. Or rather, his lying. Obama might be raising Adams' taxes, if he makes over $250,000 a year. He's almost certainly not going to raise yours.
What did Adams lie about, as you so boldy stated? Yes, he probably does make over $250,000 a year, and will be taxed more under Obama. He was only speaking for himself, and not others.
He's as scared of McCain as he is of Obama, because though he believes McCain won't tax him (but the country would fall apart, an expensive proposition even for a cartoonist who has to live in it), because McCain is boring. Which means he won't be a good cartoon subject.
I didn't realize that Scott Adams made a lot of money at political satire. I thought he still runs his Dilbert cartoon, making fun of the workplace. Maybe he's just honestly afraid that McCain really is too old for the job. I think even McCain supporters are worried about his age. He looked fit enough 8 years ago when he ran. He doesn't anymore.
Disclaimer: I have never tried marijuana or any other illegal drug.
What are you waiting for?
I was working with the Clinton-Gore '92 online campaign right at the start of the Web and later with the Whitehouse. They saw the opportunity to disintermediate the mainstream press, what W. has called 'the filter'.
How sad then that the Clinton administration was behind the Clipper chip.
BUT if I want a mixed album of certain songs, well that leads to $15-20.
Listen here, sonny. Back in my day I paid $17 dollars for a CD to get two songs I liked, and if I was lucky it contained a hidden gem and another song or two that was ok. The thought of getting 10 songs that I really liked on an album was unthinkable!
Well, it's ok. Times change and bits are flying around the Internet. The world will shake out this copyright business, for better or for worse. Just offering some perspective :)
and you have beautiful candy-like buttons
There's just something wrong with an interface that makes you want to snack on it.
I'm not a slow driver. I'm a very average driver.
Depends on where you live, but most people travel somewhat over the speed limit. You've already stated that people zip by you on the left and the right as you keep to the limit. I'd guess you are in the minority.
sometimes a person who slashes through the space ahead of you really needs to get someplace quick and ran out of time.
Endangering traffic because you ran late is not ok. Furthermore, on busy highways there's always some asshole who will cut in front of you if you leave a space.
So many assertions, all based on people's political philosophy and not on data!
So you follow that by spewing your own political philosophy without data as universal truth? The funny thing is the post you replied to was talking about data.
"Which is too bad, as she's on Ubuntu and feels left out..."
You cared enough to mention this. Mock Windows all you want, these "you can't have it because you don't run Windows" items add up. Google fucked up -- they should have made it cross-platform from the beginning.
Of course I do, because Scripture, especially the New Testament, is more allegory and example than it is literally acceptable.
That's why I accept Aesop's Fables as my bible.
What I'm describing is a boom industry
I am intrigued and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.
I'm just saying that it seems like a lot of people are committing apparent suicide these days.
I'm reminded of a short story by Stephen King, Everything's Eventual.
Funny how you manage to contradict yourself when comparing the beginning and end of your post:
Truth is, I don't really care if Chrome runs under Linux or not. [...] Even my mother-in-law asked me about Chrome. Which is too bad, as she's on Ubuntu and feels left out...
Sorry all you Ubuntu adopters. Did you really believe the hype? You should go back to Windows. Make sure to tell your friends about your disappointing experience.
"we're not fight to take away firefox's market share, we're fighting to take away IE's market share"
Look at it in that light, and it makes sense not to make it for osx and linux.
That's a short-sighted view. Microsoft's dominance, whether it's IE or Office, is based on their Windows monopoly. If you want to slay the beast, you can't do it by cutting off tentacles that regrow. Just look at IE 6 -> 7 -> 8. IE already has or is gaining tabs, processes, and privacy/security enhancing features.
Google perpetuated the Windows monopoly by designating the other platforms as second-class citizens. "Hey, we wrote some really cool software! Oh, and it's Windows only, and will remain so for a long time to come."
Of all companies, Google should have taken the time to write it cross-platform from the start. It probably would have cost them 10%-20% overhead initially, but saved a bunch down the road.
See, you're exactly the kind of person I would fire on the spot.
I'd fire you for that firing.