I love anonymity. I hate "identity management" which leaves the user with a single "approved and authenticated" online identity.
You don't know my flickr username. You don't know my Ebay username. You don't know my Friends Reunited username.
You don't know what I bought my family for christmas, what they look like, where I went to school, where I work know, where I live or what (or if) kind of car I drive. What you know about me is what I have chosen to let you know.
You can't update your OS without a connection and you can't go online safely until you've updated your OS.Of course you can. Windows XP has any number of tools available to restrict TCP/IP activity to certain ports / protocols. If you only know how to insert a CD and click on install, you shouldn't be "configuring" someone elses computer to go go walking naked on the internet.
This is a classic example of some poorly educated [l]user f*cking up his computer by misapplying limited knowledge and then blaming the OS for their own incompetence. Next time I hit my thumb instead of the nail with a hammer, I'm suing for damages too! You betcha.
If a can of tuna sold for $300 only the rich would be able to afford destroying the planet. Economic disincentives may work, but they are inherently anti-democratic.
So, apparently the blast in North Korea is approximately what you would get from blowing up 550 tons of TNT. Wowee. Such much.
That is definitely a clear provocation, which will requrie the world to invade and conquer North Korea, killing hundreds of thousands of oppressed peaseants in soldier's uniforms. Just think - those evil people are capable of buying and exploding enough fertilizer to fill an aircraft hangar - they must be stopped.
Say no to "regime change", say yes to direct democracy.
I have two daughters, 6 and 8. They share a gameboy (hell, I played Leisure Suit Larry and Elite as a kid!) and play around 2 hrs / week on it. They watch TV araound 5 hrs/week and that is probably an overestimation. They do NOT use one of the many computers I have kicking around, the Sinclairs and Commodores are off limits, so is the MDA and the laptops.
But the real reason why they don't use the computer is because I am on it. Since having had kids I've gained around 45 lbs. I have become sedentary. I am turning into a fat bastard. How many of you and your co-workers are also fat, sendentary bastards like me? There's the real problem. We blame the kids instead of (collectively) looking in the mirror.
My kids are fine, because I am a hypocrite, they don't do what I do:)
Well, maybe both Mr. Swartz and Mr. Wales are correct.
Encyclopedias are measured by the number of articles they have, the average size of those articles and the "Quality" of the articles [here see other disputes:P]. Wikipedia is trying hard for quality, hence the importance of copy editors - those quick edit users who do a lot of banging articles into shape. They do an important job. These are the general-purpose-but-shallow editors.
Of course, without the initial contribution of a large number of specialists, the working draft of many articles would never get done. These are the specialist-article-experts who know what they know, and leave the rest to others.
So, this is likely to be another case of everyone having some of the truth and only a more enlightened, liberal view of the situation can lead to insights which can be used to improve the entire content creation process.
We need a web authoring tool, integrated email and istant messenger clients. This is the way forward, the Firefox team just needs to ignore every lesson learnt in the Netscape vs. IE war.
Well the open source principles that created linux were trust, respect, mutual interest and healthy debate, as well as the donation of time and expertise.
Simply picking out the economic aspects - donation: time, expertise - does not make this venture similar to linux. Nor would it make the US Military similar to Medicines sans frontieres, an equally invalid comparison.
Given Moore's Law, and given increasing performance gains in computer architecture and new work on algorithms, how likely is it that one of these days one of these machines (or one of their exponentially more powerful progeny) bootstrap themselves into a "Singularity", an AI which at the point of self-awareness becomes almost instantaneously god-like?
I know that this has been the stuff of Science - Fiction wet dreams for decades, but will this old idea - like so many other ideas first found in science-fiction - one day become reality? And would the God-Head be dictatorial in its nihilistic contempt of its creators, or perhaps more Frankenstinian in its attempts to be accepted by humanity?
It's not the market you should be distrusting, it's the government that helps businesses push against the tide of the market at the expense of the consumer.
Unfortunately for your argument, you ignore the necessity of the state's monopoly of force for the functioning of any market. The government and the market are not competing entities, they require one another.
So, can I safely assume that you agree with me that by using All Of MP3, you are circumventing the artist's interests, and that buying mp3s from there has the same effect on the creator of the work as downloading them for free off a P2P service?
I am not a lawyer, where I am allofmp3.com can be reached and used. Their customers pay money, and receive goods in exchange. I couldn't really care less what the licensing deal is, and how much / little the artist, the label or the distributor earn.
I would prefer it, however, if artists would distribute their music directly at allofmp3.com and receive a direct payment.
And how do you propose that the creator of music, or other copyrightable works, gets compensated for their time and effort? I hear a lot of "I don't like this" phrases, but I don't hear any suggestions.
Well, not by being paid. This might come as a shock to you, but I don't think that is desirable to be forced to turn the results of your creative energy into produce for sale, in order to be able to have money for spending on survival. Indeed, plenty of people (me too) donate their ability and time in creating works which are not products (think open source software, photos released under cc-licences and suchlike). Take that principle and expand it, money becomes unnecessary.
I got the impression that you were someone who believed that all copyright, in all forms, is evil, that copyright laws only stood between you and your music, and that if the system is broken, we should just abolish it altogether.
I do. But not just copyright. All property laws are destructive, property (and licensing) is theft.
Legality is not a state of mind, it is the existence of laws on the books. Either something is legal, or it is not. Period. Just because you choose to do something that is illegal does not invalidate the concept of legality.
True, legality can be represented as positive law. There are also other branches of jurisprudence. However, the laws which enable the RIAA to be recompensed to the tune of $750 for each unlicenced track are immoral. At a different level it could be argued that money per se is immoral.
.
Usually, it's also illegal. However, there are times when murdering someone is legal, such as in self-defense, capital punishment, etc. These all vary by circumstances and locale, of course.
Of course. In Russia, it happens to be legal to do what allofmp3.com is doing.
My point was instead on the MORALITY of All Of MP3. Even though it's legal, I think it is *wrong* to use that service, because the artists are not properly compensated for their work.
And who decides what "proper" compensation is? You? The RIAA? The Senate? In this case it happens to be the consumer. Is that worse?
blah blah... The culture of our society will diminish.
I don't know what you mean by "our", if you mean the US of A then the pronoun was wrong.
Opinion and conjecture which you are entitled to. I actually was unaware that the artists recieved nothing from allofmp3.com. I was under the impression that they got something: some part of what their customers were prepared to pay.
But you are quite correct: I believe copyright is a poor excuse to create monopolies, I don't trust in market economics, and I would like everybody regardless of ability to pay to have unrestricted access to music.
Such a shame you had to resort to name calling, but then I should know better than to expect more.
Regardless of cost, or copyright, or anything else, I think it's fair that someone who created a piece of music and asked to be paid by people who want to listen to it should be paid. Just the same as someone who writes some code and puts it out under the GPL should have his or her decision to use the GPL respected. Simple as that.
That is no fairer than allowing those with money to listen to music and denying the same pleasure to those without money.
Using allofmp3 is no better than just downloading from guntella - the artist makes no money from the sale, it all goes to the russian mob to finance their "activities".
The Russian mob have no need to launder money, they have an entire government to do it for them. The same could be said of the MPAA / RIAA.
Slashdot Mirror
I love anonymity. I hate "identity management" which leaves the user with a single "approved and authenticated" online identity.
You don't know my flickr username. You don't know my Ebay username. You don't know my Friends Reunited username.
You don't know what I bought my family for christmas, what they look like, where I went to school, where I work know, where I live or what (or if) kind of car I drive. What you know about me is what I have chosen to let you know.
I like it that way.
I was going to write a post critizing the Russian government's ability to mug, steal, kill and rob at will.
But really, Russia is no worse than the USA, thanks to global hegemony induced TRIPS.
You can't update your OS without a connection and you can't go online safely until you've updated your OS.Of course you can. Windows XP has any number of tools available to restrict TCP/IP activity to certain ports / protocols. If you only know how to insert a CD and click on install, you shouldn't be "configuring" someone elses computer to go go walking naked on the internet.
This is a classic example of some poorly educated [l]user f*cking up his computer by misapplying limited knowledge and then blaming the OS for their own incompetence. Next time I hit my thumb instead of the nail with a hammer, I'm suing for damages too! You betcha.
Hey! I've seen microwaved Gremlins, at least I did when watching the film!
On a side note, I think I'm getting old...
If a can of tuna sold for $300 only the rich would be able to afford destroying the planet. Economic disincentives may work, but they are inherently anti-democratic.
The "Bush Administration Official" quoted by Fox probably a former Fox employee.
Didn't you know that all serious news channels can back up their claims with reputable citations?
North Korean capital
I believe the word you are looking for is "Pyong Yang".
Hey, why don't you go there yourself and send us back an eyewitness report?
http://www.koryogroup.com/ will help you.
So, apparently the blast in North Korea is approximately what you would get from blowing up 550 tons of TNT. Wowee. Such much.
That is definitely a clear provocation, which will requrie the world to invade and conquer North Korea, killing hundreds of thousands of oppressed peaseants in soldier's uniforms. Just think - those evil people are capable of buying and exploding enough fertilizer to fill an aircraft hangar - they must be stopped.
Say no to "regime change", say yes to direct democracy.
How to find security holes in PHP web applications:
e +%5C%24_POST+-addslashes+lang%3Aphp
http://www.google.com/codesearch?hl=en&lr=&q=Wher
Some knowledge for you:
N /ALKALI/CD2R1.HTM
http://jchemed.chem.wisc.edu/jcesoft/cca/CCA2/MAI
But they don't explain anything which might make me consider them to be trustworthy.
This is a skethcy sketch, methinks.
Well,
/week and that is probably an overestimation. They do NOT use one of the many computers I have kicking around, the Sinclairs and Commodores are off limits, so is the MDA and the laptops.
:)
I have two daughters, 6 and 8. They share a gameboy (hell, I played Leisure Suit Larry and Elite as a kid!) and play around 2 hrs / week on it. They watch TV araound 5 hrs
But the real reason why they don't use the computer is because I am on it. Since having had kids I've gained around 45 lbs. I have become sedentary. I am turning into a fat bastard. How many of you and your co-workers are also fat, sendentary bastards like me? There's the real problem. We blame the kids instead of (collectively) looking in the mirror. My kids are fine, because I am a hypocrite, they don't do what I do
Idiot :P
Who rattled your cage?
Well, maybe both Mr. Swartz and Mr. Wales are correct.
:P]. Wikipedia is trying hard for quality, hence the importance of copy editors - those quick edit users who do a lot of banging articles into shape. They do an important job. These are the general-purpose-but-shallow editors.
Encyclopedias are measured by the number of articles they have, the average size of those articles and the "Quality" of the articles [here see other disputes
Of course, without the initial contribution of a large number of specialists, the working draft of many articles would never get done. These are the specialist-article-experts who know what they know, and leave the rest to others.
So, this is likely to be another case of everyone having some of the truth and only a more enlightened, liberal view of the situation can lead to insights which can be used to improve the entire content creation process.
Yes. Next time I'll apply the sarcasm in thicker layers.
Yes Sirree, a browser Suite is what we need.
We need a web authoring tool, integrated email and istant messenger clients. This is the way forward, the Firefox team just needs to ignore every lesson learnt in the Netscape vs. IE war.
read "exploits".
"the same open source principle"
Well the open source principles that created linux were trust, respect, mutual interest and healthy debate, as well as the donation of time and expertise.
Simply picking out the economic aspects - donation: time, expertise - does not make this venture similar to linux. Nor would it make the US Military similar to Medicines sans frontieres, an equally invalid comparison.
Hi,
Given Moore's Law, and given increasing performance gains in computer architecture and new work on algorithms, how likely is it that one of these days one of these machines (or one of their exponentially more powerful progeny) bootstrap themselves into a "Singularity", an AI which at the point of self-awareness becomes almost instantaneously god-like?
I know that this has been the stuff of Science - Fiction wet dreams for decades, but will this old idea - like so many other ideas first found in science-fiction - one day become reality? And would the God-Head be dictatorial in its nihilistic contempt of its creators, or perhaps more Frankenstinian in its attempts to be accepted by humanity?
A thousand billion bits of music or one bit of bad writing style?
It's not the market you should be distrusting, it's the government that helps businesses push against the tide of the market at the expense of the consumer.
Unfortunately for your argument, you ignore the necessity of the state's monopoly of force for the functioning of any market. The government and the market are not competing entities, they require one another.
So, can I safely assume that you agree with me that by using All Of MP3, you are circumventing the artist's interests, and that buying mp3s from there has the same effect on the creator of the work as downloading them for free off a P2P service?
I am not a lawyer, where I am allofmp3.com can be reached and used. Their customers pay money, and receive goods in exchange. I couldn't really care less what the licensing deal is, and how much / little the artist, the label or the distributor earn.
I would prefer it, however, if artists would distribute their music directly at allofmp3.com and receive a direct payment.
And how do you propose that the creator of music, or other copyrightable works, gets compensated for their time and effort? I hear a lot of "I don't like this" phrases, but I don't hear any suggestions.
Well, not by being paid. This might come as a shock to you, but I don't think that is desirable to be forced to turn the results of your creative energy into produce for sale, in order to be able to have money for spending on survival. Indeed, plenty of people (me too) donate their ability and time in creating works which are not products (think open source software, photos released under cc-licences and suchlike). Take that principle and expand it, money becomes unnecessary.
I got the impression that you were someone who believed that all copyright, in all forms, is evil, that copyright laws only stood between you and your music, and that if the system is broken, we should just abolish it altogether.
I do. But not just copyright. All property laws are destructive, property (and licensing) is theft.
Legality is not a state of mind, it is the existence of laws on the books. Either something is legal, or it is not. Period. Just because you choose to do something that is illegal does not invalidate the concept of legality.
... The culture of our society will diminish.
True, legality can be represented as positive law. There are also other branches of jurisprudence. However, the laws which enable the RIAA to be recompensed to the tune of $750 for each unlicenced track are immoral. At a different level it could be argued that money per se is immoral.
. Usually, it's also illegal. However, there are times when murdering someone is legal, such as in self-defense, capital punishment, etc. These all vary by circumstances and locale, of course.
Of course. In Russia, it happens to be legal to do what allofmp3.com is doing.
My point was instead on the MORALITY of All Of MP3. Even though it's legal, I think it is *wrong* to use that service, because the artists are not properly compensated for their work.
And who decides what "proper" compensation is? You? The RIAA? The Senate? In this case it happens to be the consumer. Is that worse?
blah blah
I don't know what you mean by "our", if you mean the US of A then the pronoun was wrong.
Opinion and conjecture which you are entitled to. I actually was unaware that the artists recieved nothing from allofmp3.com. I was under the impression that they got something: some part of what their customers were prepared to pay.
But you are quite correct: I believe copyright is a poor excuse to create monopolies, I don't trust in market economics, and I would like everybody regardless of ability to pay to have unrestricted access to music.
Such a shame you had to resort to name calling, but then I should know better than to expect more.
Regardless of cost, or copyright, or anything else, I think it's fair that someone who created a piece of music and asked to be paid by people who want to listen to it should be paid. Just the same as someone who writes some code and puts it out under the GPL should have his or her decision to use the GPL respected. Simple as that. That is no fairer than allowing those with money to listen to music and denying the same pleasure to those without money. Using allofmp3 is no better than just downloading from guntella - the artist makes no money from the sale, it all goes to the russian mob to finance their "activities". The Russian mob have no need to launder money, they have an entire government to do it for them. The same could be said of the MPAA / RIAA.