Yes, you are free to cease producing works, but at least, when something is ripped off, it shows that the work in question is still desired.
At least in that case, it shows that it would be possible to work with the people who want your work, and perhaps get them to pay for it again. There will always be those who take something without paying, but there are also those who look at various prices of various goods and feel that the prices are too high.
If people who ripped the works off simply didn't get them, it would show a lower interest in the work in question, when such was not really the case. What would happen, then?
Ripping it off is empirical evidence the ripper wants the product but is to friggin' cheap to pay the owner for it.
While I will not disagree that some people are simply too cheap to pay for something, it seems to me that, more often than not, the reason something is ripped off is because it is overpriced.
There are numerous products that I feel are worth paying for, but are simply much too expensive. I would gladly pay money for the product, but I have no intention of paying the current asking price.
Why, again, am I paying the same amount for digitally-downloaded movies/music/books/software as I am when I buy it in a store? The cost of distribution on a digital front is far lower than it is on a physical front, so prices should logically be lower, especially when, in the case of movies and music, if I want to put them on the physical front equal to what I would buy in a store, I'll have to pay out more money to do so.
That doesn't necessarily show that the people ripping something off are too cheap to buy it, it shows that the company putting it out is too greedy to realize they are hurting themselves more than helping.
Not that this is really Slashdot-worthy, but... Who am I to decide what may or may not be worthy for this site.
Anyway, the actual number of results is far less. Looking at Google right now, it shows "about 8,300" for the "died in a blogging accident" search. However, actually going through and looking at the real number (skip to the end of the list, show all results, skip to the end again) and the results are much smaller.
Before enabling all references, there are a mere 243 results. Displaying all results, including those from the same site, yields only 849 hits.
While still interesting to see that it jumped from 2 to 849 in a day's time, it is still nowhere near 7000+ as advertised here.
Who cares about sex and porn? That stuff is so over-rated, it's pathetic.
Now, murder (and violence in general), showing people's heads get splattered against a wall, watching people get thrown through a window and land twenty stories below in a heap of gore, watching people get skinned alive, now/that/ stuff is the good stuff!
All this talk about penises and vaginae and sex is just so tiring. I think I'll go watch a few murder movies to get my mind off it.
I just want to point out, that the WD DRM affects everybody, not just Linux. Claiming that it is some mass conspiracy against Linux is a bit alarmist at this point, since it is only Seagate who is producing an apparently "anti-Linux" drive.
The WD drives also work just fine, as long as you don't use their Mionet thing. In addition, you can transfer any content you like on Mionet, you just can't have certain types of files available for anybody and everybody to have access to at their choosing. You can still transfer the restricted files, as long as you are logged into your account. The Mionet limitations exists most probably to cover themselves from the lawsuit-happy Mafiaa people. Considering how much WD is worth, compared to a normal user, WD would be a juicy target to hit.
And yes, WD could supply themselves with the lawyers necessary to keep them from actually losing the case, but the cost of having the lawyers and the cost of the publicity would still hurt badly. Unfortunately for them, the publicity of the restrictions has been blown severely out of proportions and will be hurting them, as well. Yes, there are restrictions, and yes, people with their own MP3's and AVI's are getting shafted when they want to share them, but all of the news stories about the restrictions (most of which seem to base their own information on the Reg's story) are making it sound like nobody can access this stuff, at all. That is simply not true.
Damned if they do, damned if they don't.
As for Seagate, I can understand the drives being sent as NTFS, and I can understand, if some newish programmer or head dev were in charge, how the remounting would be messed up.
Why lash out, and claim a conspiracy, when it may not be? Wait until we have a bit more information than simply knowing that X and Y features don't work with Linux.
And the insane keep the wise looking over their shoulders.
It only takes one company willing to stick their neck out to throw a massive wrench in the best of plans.
Of course, I don't seen any of the current potential bidders taking many, if any, risks with this, but there are other companies out there who might be willing to risk a bid, if only to to cause chaos and confusion.
If Comcast were only throttling BitTorrent traffic, I would not have so much an issue with it (so long as the throttled speeds were decent enough to serve ISOs and WoW updates).
Unfortunately, it is not about throttling, it is about killing entirely. When every attempt to connect is killed, you are not delaying traffic, you are stopping it entirely. But that is only one issue on the table with Comcast and its anti-BitTorrent activities, and quite frankly, it is a minor issue compared to the other.
More important to me, and hopefully to everybody else, is that Comcast is killing BitTorrent traffic by spoofing the users, and not always its own users. They are pretending to be their customers and the people they connect with, whether or not the people they are connected with are Comcast customers, to send the reset packets.
I don't know about you, but quite frankly, having/any/ company masquerade as its users is frightening. With a massive company such as Comcast faking its identity, it is out-and-out mortifying.
Throttling would be one thing. Killing by falsifying oneself as the customers they represent is another entirely.
Permit me to clarify my last statement, that the list is useless.
If a terrorist organization was going to plot something, what are the chances that they go to such great lengths to conceal their movements and actions, secretly getting everything ready, but then forget to check to see if any of the people they are using are on the list or not? It isn't too hard. If they are already in the States, have them fly out to Vegas for the weekend. If they are able to get on the plane, they are safe to use. If they can't, you use someone else.
The terrorist list is nothing more than a feel-good attempt at protecting people. It is not too different from many anti-gun laws; it looks OK on paper and it is great for lip-service, but it is absolutely useless for actually protecting those it is meant to protect.
Every time I hear about that terrorist list, I can't help but think it is complete and total bunk.
Honestly, if there were that many terrorists in the States, there wouldn't be enough non-terrorists left to care. Even if it/is/ just a list of "potential" terrorists, one would think that, at some point,/somebody/ in the government would realize that list is almost useless...
Technically, human life will not continue, even if we survive for another 100,000,000 years.
Considering the effects of evolution, who is to say that in 100,000 years, the decedents of modern humans would not be recognizable as humans in our current understanding?
Compare what we call "human" today, and compare it to our ancestors from the past. How far back will you have to go until you reach a point where you say "That is not human." even though it is possible to trace our ancestry to them?
They do not limit it to just religious myths, but any "oogie-boogie" myths (in Adam's own words).
They've done a few in the past (such as the "pyramids of power" myth [or something along that name]) and on that show, Adam specifically said that he hoped that they would not have to do any more "oogie-boogie" myths. It was later explained to be anything along the lines of bigfoot, Loch Ness Monster, psychics, astrology, aliens, et cetra.
Really, they limit themselves to things that are truly testable; they avoid just about anything where there is no real ability to lay claims along one line or the other without getting into otherwise supernatural beliefs.
Right now, there is no major reason for the States to be going back to the moon. Other than showing we still can (considering we went up there six times forty years ago, it should be pretty obvious we can) there is almost no real point to it.
It would be better to let private corporations, as bad as they are, do it, instead of NASA or the government. Right now, there is just no reason to waste the money going there to find more of the same rocks we found before.
"when will Americans start to realize that there's just a wee bit of fascism taking hold of their nation? You'd think with something as clear-cut as this, more people would wake up to that fact..."
Those who have the power to change things don't want to, because they are making off like bandits in the night with money and power. Those who do want to change things don't have the power, and many of them live in fear of their own government.
"Say what you like about Apple, there should be some rewards for innovation."
What innovation? Nokia's n95 does just about everything that the iPhone does and does it just as well, and was released several months before the iPhone. There is relatively little that either phone can do that the other cannot, and neither of the two smartphones is really able to beat the other out overall (sure, one may be better at one thing than the other, leaving it up to the end-user to decide which to go with, but overall, both the n95 and the iPhone stack up just about the same).
The biggest difference between the n95 and the iPhone is the hype that Apple had going for the iPhone (which, in my opinion after using the iPhone for a bit now, was really quite overdone).
My guess is that it caught two, but was only able to remove or prevent one from infecting the machine. If it successfully caught and removed one, it would give it 4%, and if it caught (noticed) a second but was unable to do anything about it, it might have gotten a point or two for noticing it and being able to alert the user to something being wrong, but did not get full points since it could not remove or prevent an infection from the second.
That's just thoughts, though; I am too tired to read the article in-depth, but considering how people are responding, I have a feeling that this sort of thing isn't mentioned in it.
The red cross trademark has been "destroyed" for a long time, in the minds of many people. There are a huge number of people out there who associate the red cross trademark with the Red Cross organization, and think that they permit its use on approved medical supplies and home aid kids.
No matter how 'in-the-right' JnJ are with defending their trademark, for a lot of people, they don't associate it with JnJ, but with the Red Cross. JnJ are shooting themselves in the feet with this, since it is so easy to manufacture some bad press and make them look like the bad guys. And considering how gullible and sheepish so many people are...
I have to be honest, that I think it would have been wiser for JnJ to either give the trademark to the Red Cross with an agreement that JnJ can use it on their products, or quietly switch to a new trademark that hasn't already been "lost" in the minds of so many.
What are you talking about? Of/COURSE/ radio is a major distribution channel. Why, without it, my FM transmitter wouldn't work and I'd be forced to listen to my MP3 player (and its load of Internet music and all the new and good artists the Internet brings with it) through uncomfortable and awkward headphones whenever I'm driving.
Whether or not anybody here agrees with how Alexa works, the fact of the matter is that it/does/ work. It isn't because it gets a good concensus of the Internet as a whole, but because it gets a good concensus of the primary target for businesses and advertising.
I'm not sure that many major businesses are going to be targeting more advanced and knowledgeable crowds (dealing with physical products right now, not with the Nielsen ratings and DVRs and such). I will admit that my knowledge here is quite limited, but from what I've seen, the three major demographics in the case of online advertising and businesses (the casual user, the average Joe and the advanced/knowledgeable user) are all on a different field for the advertisers to make money from.
The average Joe users tend to be relatively easy to make money from, along with the casual user, and are more likely to take advantage of Alexa. Those average Joe's will generally pick up something new relatively quickly in comparison with the casual users, but their opinions will trickle down to the casual users later on, giving businesses who would use Alexa an early and later source of revenue.
As has been mentioned, though, the early adopters tend to most often be knowledgeable users, as well as long-term sources of income. Except for when something isn't quite up to par.
For example, if a company is advertising, say, a 4GB flash drive for $30, the average Joe and some casual users would probably jump on the deal, and while the knowledgeable users might be interested enough to buy one, they'll probably be the ones to do the research to find out that said drive only has single-digit read/write speed. That might be enough to turn some of the advanced users from buying the drive, opting for a smaller or more expensive drive with better performance.
Along the same lines, a company selling a high-capacity HDD at a very low price would likely get in a large number of average users and some casual users, while the more advanced users might recognize the company as one who tends to have low-quality products with weak warranties.
What does all this matter? While most companies (at least in the States, I apologize for not being knowledgeable about non-U.S. businesses but I can't imagine they would be much different) are indeed concerned about the future, many are more interested in there here-and-now more than they are the future. If the company is losing profit over several years, investors will tend to abandon that company in favor of one who is turning a profit right away, even if the first company, the one taking a loss now, is building up a solid reputation and loyalty from the advanced users who will make the company far more money over the long-term than the second business who is catering only to the casual and average users. Of course, once the first company starts turning a solid profit, investors will be interested again, but if the company was abandoned badly enough in the beginning, it may never get the chance to turn a profit.
Simply put, Alexa works because it gives information on the people who will turn a profit early on and continue to turn a profit over time, regardless of whether or not that profit is as high as it could be.
Anyway, sorry if this isn't all that comprehensible. I'm not all that great with putting my thoughts into words.
Junkmail is less of an issue than spam eMail because the senders have to pay for junk mail. If you just throw away the junk mail, the senders are out the money it took to design, print (paper, ink and machinery) and mail it.
With spam, the sender is out nothing. Most spam is sent via bot-nets, and the people who suffer the most from spam are those duped by it, and those whose machines are used to send it.
Getting junk mail and throwing it away puts the company out that much money. Getting spam and deleting it doesn't out the sender anything, but it does out the infected computers.
one of these days, the RIAA are going to piss off the wrong person, and someone is going to end up hurt or dead.
It is just disgusting that a group is able to legally steal from people who refuse to have affiliation with it.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, you are free to cease producing works, but at least, when something is ripped off, it shows that the work in question is still desired.
At least in that case, it shows that it would be possible to work with the people who want your work, and perhaps get them to pay for it again. There will always be those who take something without paying, but there are also those who look at various prices of various goods and feel that the prices are too high.
If people who ripped the works off simply didn't get them, it would show a lower interest in the work in question, when such was not really the case. What would happen, then?
While I will not disagree that some people are simply too cheap to pay for something, it seems to me that, more often than not, the reason something is ripped off is because it is overpriced.
There are numerous products that I feel are worth paying for, but are simply much too expensive. I would gladly pay money for the product, but I have no intention of paying the current asking price.
Why, again, am I paying the same amount for digitally-downloaded movies/music/books/software as I am when I buy it in a store? The cost of distribution on a digital front is far lower than it is on a physical front, so prices should logically be lower, especially when, in the case of movies and music, if I want to put them on the physical front equal to what I would buy in a store, I'll have to pay out more money to do so.
That doesn't necessarily show that the people ripping something off are too cheap to buy it, it shows that the company putting it out is too greedy to realize they are hurting themselves more than helping.
Not that this is really Slashdot-worthy, but... Who am I to decide what may or may not be worthy for this site.
Anyway, the actual number of results is far less.
Looking at Google right now, it shows "about 8,300" for the "died in a blogging accident" search.
However, actually going through and looking at the real number (skip to the end of the list, show all results, skip to the end again) and the results are much smaller.
Before enabling all references, there are a mere 243 results. Displaying all results, including those from the same site, yields only 849 hits.
While still interesting to see that it jumped from 2 to 849 in a day's time, it is still nowhere near 7000+ as advertised here.
Who cares about sex and porn? That stuff is so over-rated, it's pathetic.
/that/ stuff is the good stuff!
Now, murder (and violence in general), showing people's heads get splattered against a wall, watching people get thrown through a window and land twenty stories below in a heap of gore, watching people get skinned alive, now
All this talk about penises and vaginae and sex is just so tiring.
I think I'll go watch a few murder movies to get my mind off it.
Is it bad to fear the government charged with my safety more than I fear the terrorists they are claiming to protect me against?
I just want to point out, that the WD DRM affects everybody, not just Linux.
Claiming that it is some mass conspiracy against Linux is a bit alarmist at this point, since it is only Seagate who is producing an apparently "anti-Linux" drive.
The WD drives also work just fine, as long as you don't use their Mionet thing. In addition, you can transfer any content you like on Mionet, you just can't have certain types of files available for anybody and everybody to have access to at their choosing. You can still transfer the restricted files, as long as you are logged into your account. The Mionet limitations exists most probably to cover themselves from the lawsuit-happy Mafiaa people. Considering how much WD is worth, compared to a normal user, WD would be a juicy target to hit.
And yes, WD could supply themselves with the lawyers necessary to keep them from actually losing the case, but the cost of having the lawyers and the cost of the publicity would still hurt badly. Unfortunately for them, the publicity of the restrictions has been blown severely out of proportions and will be hurting them, as well. Yes, there are restrictions, and yes, people with their own MP3's and AVI's are getting shafted when they want to share them, but all of the news stories about the restrictions (most of which seem to base their own information on the Reg's story) are making it sound like nobody can access this stuff, at all. That is simply not true.
Damned if they do, damned if they don't.
As for Seagate, I can understand the drives being sent as NTFS, and I can understand, if some newish programmer or head dev were in charge, how the remounting would be messed up.
Why lash out, and claim a conspiracy, when it may not be? Wait until we have a bit more information than simply knowing that X and Y features don't work with Linux.
And the insane keep the wise looking over their shoulders.
It only takes one company willing to stick their neck out to throw a massive wrench in the best of plans.
Of course, I don't seen any of the current potential bidders taking many, if any, risks with this, but there are other companies out there who might be willing to risk a bid, if only to to cause chaos and confusion.
If Comcast were only throttling BitTorrent traffic, I would not have so much an issue with it (so long as the throttled speeds were decent enough to serve ISOs and WoW updates).
/any/ company masquerade as its users is frightening.
Unfortunately, it is not about throttling, it is about killing entirely. When every attempt to connect is killed, you are not delaying traffic, you are stopping it entirely. But that is only one issue on the table with Comcast and its anti-BitTorrent activities, and quite frankly, it is a minor issue compared to the other.
More important to me, and hopefully to everybody else, is that Comcast is killing BitTorrent traffic by spoofing the users, and not always its own users. They are pretending to be their customers and the people they connect with, whether or not the people they are connected with are Comcast customers, to send the reset packets.
I don't know about you, but quite frankly, having
With a massive company such as Comcast faking its identity, it is out-and-out mortifying.
Throttling would be one thing. Killing by falsifying oneself as the customers they represent is another entirely.
Permit me to clarify my last statement, that the list is useless. If a terrorist organization was going to plot something, what are the chances that they go to such great lengths to conceal their movements and actions, secretly getting everything ready, but then forget to check to see if any of the people they are using are on the list or not? It isn't too hard. If they are already in the States, have them fly out to Vegas for the weekend. If they are able to get on the plane, they are safe to use. If they can't, you use someone else. The terrorist list is nothing more than a feel-good attempt at protecting people. It is not too different from many anti-gun laws; it looks OK on paper and it is great for lip-service, but it is absolutely useless for actually protecting those it is meant to protect.
Every time I hear about that terrorist list, I can't help but think it is complete and total bunk.
/is/ just a list of "potential" terrorists, one would think that, at some point, /somebody/ in the government would realize that list is almost useless...
Honestly, if there were that many terrorists in the States, there wouldn't be enough non-terrorists left to care. Even if it
Technically, human life will not continue, even if we survive for another 100,000,000 years.
Considering the effects of evolution, who is to say that in 100,000 years, the decedents of modern humans would not be recognizable as humans in our current understanding?
Compare what we call "human" today, and compare it to our ancestors from the past. How far back will you have to go until you reach a point where you say "That is not human." even though it is possible to trace our ancestry to them?
There are some rather interesting comments in TFA.
"People are just scared when they hear radiation," Byron said. "Too many zombie movies."Not necessarily the first thing I think of when I hear "radiation"...
"They're all laboratory-grade. Farm fresh," Imahara said.I realize why they need specially-farmed roaches, but honestly, that line cracks me up.
All the bugs will go back to San Francisco. But instead of flying, a Mythbusters employee is having to drive the bugs back.I wonder if the driver will have any difficulties getting a hotel, or if they intend to do it in one shot (~16-18 hours for a drive, I think).
Airlines, it seems, don't like cockroaches on a plane."Um, excuse me. My olives seem to be moving."
Worst news of all:
The episode should air in about four months.Oh deuteronomy... It's going to be one long wait. Oh well.
They do not limit it to just religious myths, but any "oogie-boogie" myths (in Adam's own words).
They've done a few in the past (such as the "pyramids of power" myth [or something along that name]) and on that show, Adam specifically said that he hoped that they would not have to do any more "oogie-boogie" myths. It was later explained to be anything along the lines of bigfoot, Loch Ness Monster, psychics, astrology, aliens, et cetra.
Really, they limit themselves to things that are truly testable; they avoid just about anything where there is no real ability to lay claims along one line or the other without getting into otherwise supernatural beliefs.
I hope that 380 was a typo... The population of the United States is closer to 300 million.
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/us.html#People
According to the CIA, their July 2007 estimate is 301,139,947 people.
(ironically enough, the captcha is "accuracy"...)
Right now, there is no major reason for the States to be going back to the moon. Other than showing we still can (considering we went up there six times forty years ago, it should be pretty obvious we can) there is almost no real point to it.
It would be better to let private corporations, as bad as they are, do it, instead of NASA or the government. Right now, there is just no reason to waste the money going there to find more of the same rocks we found before.
"when will Americans start to realize that there's just a wee bit of fascism taking hold of their nation? You'd think with something as clear-cut as this, more people would wake up to that fact..."
Those who have the power to change things don't want to, because they are making off like bandits in the night with money and power.
Those who do want to change things don't have the power, and many of them live in fear of their own government.
Nice list, but my personal favorite is still
-inurl:htm -inurl:html intitle:"index of" "Last modified" mp3
Of course, it doesn't have to end with mp3, if that isn't what you want.
"Say what you like about Apple, there should be some rewards for innovation."
What innovation? Nokia's n95 does just about everything that the iPhone does and does it just as well, and was released several months before the iPhone. There is relatively little that either phone can do that the other cannot, and neither of the two smartphones is really able to beat the other out overall (sure, one may be better at one thing than the other, leaving it up to the end-user to decide which to go with, but overall, both the n95 and the iPhone stack up just about the same).
The biggest difference between the n95 and the iPhone is the hype that Apple had going for the iPhone (which, in my opinion after using the iPhone for a bit now, was really quite overdone).
My guess is that it caught two, but was only able to remove or prevent one from infecting the machine. If it successfully caught and removed one, it would give it 4%, and if it caught (noticed) a second but was unable to do anything about it, it might have gotten a point or two for noticing it and being able to alert the user to something being wrong, but did not get full points since it could not remove or prevent an infection from the second.
That's just thoughts, though; I am too tired to read the article in-depth, but considering how people are responding, I have a feeling that this sort of thing isn't mentioned in it.
The red cross trademark has been "destroyed" for a long time, in the minds of many people. There are a huge number of people out there who associate the red cross trademark with the Red Cross organization, and think that they permit its use on approved medical supplies and home aid kids.
No matter how 'in-the-right' JnJ are with defending their trademark, for a lot of people, they don't associate it with JnJ, but with the Red Cross. JnJ are shooting themselves in the feet with this, since it is so easy to manufacture some bad press and make them look like the bad guys. And considering how gullible and sheepish so many people are...
I have to be honest, that I think it would have been wiser for JnJ to either give the trademark to the Red Cross with an agreement that JnJ can use it on their products, or quietly switch to a new trademark that hasn't already been "lost" in the minds of so many.
What are you talking about? Of /COURSE/ radio is a major distribution channel. Why, without it, my FM transmitter wouldn't work and I'd be forced to listen to my MP3 player (and its load of Internet music and all the new and good artists the Internet brings with it) through uncomfortable and awkward headphones whenever I'm driving.
Whether or not anybody here agrees with how Alexa works, the fact of the matter is that it /does/ work. It isn't because it gets a good concensus of the Internet as a whole, but because it gets a good concensus of the primary target for businesses and advertising.
I'm not sure that many major businesses are going to be targeting more advanced and knowledgeable crowds (dealing with physical products right now, not with the Nielsen ratings and DVRs and such). I will admit that my knowledge here is quite limited, but from what I've seen, the three major demographics in the case of online advertising and businesses (the casual user, the average Joe and the advanced/knowledgeable user) are all on a different field for the advertisers to make money from.
The average Joe users tend to be relatively easy to make money from, along with the casual user, and are more likely to take advantage of Alexa. Those average Joe's will generally pick up something new relatively quickly in comparison with the casual users, but their opinions will trickle down to the casual users later on, giving businesses who would use Alexa an early and later source of revenue.
As has been mentioned, though, the early adopters tend to most often be knowledgeable users, as well as long-term sources of income. Except for when something isn't quite up to par.
For example, if a company is advertising, say, a 4GB flash drive for $30, the average Joe and some casual users would probably jump on the deal, and while the knowledgeable users might be interested enough to buy one, they'll probably be the ones to do the research to find out that said drive only has single-digit read/write speed. That might be enough to turn some of the advanced users from buying the drive, opting for a smaller or more expensive drive with better performance.
Along the same lines, a company selling a high-capacity HDD at a very low price would likely get in a large number of average users and some casual users, while the more advanced users might recognize the company as one who tends to have low-quality products with weak warranties.
What does all this matter? While most companies (at least in the States, I apologize for not being knowledgeable about non-U.S. businesses but I can't imagine they would be much different) are indeed concerned about the future, many are more interested in there here-and-now more than they are the future. If the company is losing profit over several years, investors will tend to abandon that company in favor of one who is turning a profit right away, even if the first company, the one taking a loss now, is building up a solid reputation and loyalty from the advanced users who will make the company far more money over the long-term than the second business who is catering only to the casual and average users. Of course, once the first company starts turning a solid profit, investors will be interested again, but if the company was abandoned badly enough in the beginning, it may never get the chance to turn a profit.
Simply put, Alexa works because it gives information on the people who will turn a profit early on and continue to turn a profit over time, regardless of whether or not that profit is as high as it could be.
Anyway, sorry if this isn't all that comprehensible. I'm not all that great with putting my thoughts into words.
Junkmail is less of an issue than spam eMail because the senders have to pay for junk mail. If you just throw away the junk mail, the senders are out the money it took to design, print (paper, ink and machinery) and mail it.
With spam, the sender is out nothing. Most spam is sent via bot-nets, and the people who suffer the most from spam are those duped by it, and those whose machines are used to send it.
Getting junk mail and throwing it away puts the company out that much money. Getting spam and deleting it doesn't out the sender anything, but it does out the infected computers.
So yes, spam is a bigger issue than junk mail.
*coughcough* Sorry, had a chair in my throat there.
I would be surprised if this hasn't been mentioned already for this posting. A pity that the 1 May date has already come and gone.
one of these days, the RIAA are going to piss off the wrong person, and someone is going to end up hurt or dead. It is just disgusting that a group is able to legally steal from people who refuse to have affiliation with it.