That's a good point and if we were talking about 1997 or 98 I would agree. However in 95 MS did NOT have the deathgrip on the market it later received. IBM marketing dropped the ball on OS/2, and no other PC OS'es were accessible enough for Joe User. There was no forcing by MS here. The market made a choice. Uninformed? Definitely. To the point of harm to the consumer? I don't think so. If something that much more amazing (in terms of usability and ease) had been around the same thing would have happened, just not to MS. The market was waiting for something big. MS filled that hole. Not the best choice in my opinion, but it could have been worse. The market may have chosen nothing. Then you have no incentive to push technology to the level it's come to today. And that would be worse than anything.
By the way, I agree about CompUSA. They have the stupidest people I have ever seen as employees.
Hold on. We live in a free market society. Noone was FORCED anything. You always had a choice. You can't compare MS to AT&T. With AT&T there was truly NO choice. If I go and buy a Ford because there is a Ford dealership next door to my house, has Ford screwed me because they make shitty cars? No, I have screwed myself for not looking down the street at the Toyota/Mazda/Honda/Olds/Lexus/BMW dealerships.
I know I am not the average computer consumer. However I am the average car/dishwasher/carpet/furniture buyer. If I don't make an informed decision, and don't get the best for my value, I am an idiot (and I am because I owned a Taurus at one point `;^).
I ran Slackware before I ran 95. I also owned a mac (still have it, a quadra). At the time of the chicago beta I was running (On multiple machines) Slackware, SCO Unix, Solaris, OS/2, AND the beta. Not to mention my battered Quadra. SCO and Solaris were expensive (I had copies from my job). Slackware was free. OS/2 was around $150 usd. Where was that lack of choice again?
uhhhhhh no. If you are FORCED to play the latest, greatest games then you are FORCED to use windows. However, MS doesn't FORCE companies to not develop for Linux. Unfortunately since Linux has had a miniscule market share up until this year, it has been pointless for game companies to devote time and resources to a product they won't make money on. Welcome to the real world. It is driven by money. All of these companies are the same, some are just larger than others.
Win95 does not have integrated IE. 98 does but it can be removed with 98lite. 98 remains fully functional at this point. What does that mean? IE is integrated into the SHELL. 98lite replaces it with the win95 shell. 98lite is a free, small utility that runs quickly and effectively.
You could always buy a PC without windows on it, just not necessarily from Dell. But you have always had a choice. Even in 1995 small computer stores were everywhere, providing choice.
As to MS's practices with OEM's, no argument here.
Indeed. And at what age do you think a child can/should work? Should a 13-year old be working? For that matter can a 13-year old even get a job (they can't in Canada). Please remember that the days of sending our childern off to work 50 hours weeks in sweatshops is long gone (in the US and Canada at any rate), new thinking is that perhaps we should allow our kids to go to school and perhaps to have fun and, well, be kids.
The original post refered to college students.
Don't tell me you couldn't get a copy made, tapes were around 10 years ago. Also, please don't try and say that 'MP3s are different because they are digital'. Good 1/8" tape sounds better than 128k MP3. MP3 is a lossy format.
Agreed which is why I don't use MP3. Again please see the parent to my post so you can se why I made the argument I did.
Try $15-$17USD CD. Plus, the pirates have a point: The ability to afford it isn't the main point, the point is that it is overpriced. Look at the facts: A CD can't cost any more than about $1.00USD to make and that is counting the inserts. Also the artists don't get much either (how much depends on the artist but it is usually around $.50-$1.00USD). So where is all the money going? To the recording companies and to the stores. The middlemen in other words. Also, recording companies do have a monoply of sorts. If you want music from a given band, you are forced to buy it from a specific label and at the price they set. You have no option to get it for less from anyone else since that label owns all right to that music.
I buy CD's new for 12 dollars all the time, then again I live in Cleveland, hence a lower cost of living, and I know where to shop.
Apparently net access is practically free, and downloading MP3's is free, so.... I'll let you judge whether working is necessary for these things.
Was your computer free? Is your electricity free?
You play into the hands of some very rich, arrogant, power-hungry people.
Do you have a car? If so you have done this. Do you own clothing from any store? If so you have done this. Do you ever eat fast food? If so you have done this. My point? I am no fan of the RIAA, I try to buy my CD's used as much as possible. Just because they are the scapegoats of the week however, I am not going to act like they are what's wrong with this country. You want to make the world a better place? Go work in a soup kitchen. Support the EZLN. Become a public school teacher in the inner city. Don't tell me that stealing from the rich and giving to yourself is some noble purpose that should be admired.
By the way, according to your email you are on roadrunner and YOU, my friend are playing into the hands of some very rich, arrogant, power-hungry people.
Copyright is undoubtedly artificial. However so is the "right to life". Don't get me wrong that is a right I definitely cherish =).But that's a different conversation.
The post I was responding too said they had the "natural right" to listen to any music I created whether I said they could or not. If I don't have the "natural right" to stop you from taking what is mine, you don't have the "natural right" to take it.
Wait a minute, I am supposed to expect everything for free? Everything in the world should be given to me because I don't want to have a job? What is outdated about providing for yourself?
Good point. What I meant by work ethic is the desire to work to get things at all. The reasoning presented was that unfortunate net users can't afford CD's. This was used as a justification for mp3 downloading. I say you should work for what you get. If that means getting 150$ an hour and working ten hours a week so be it, more power to you. But you must try in the first place. If I ahve to work 60 hours a week, well that's my lot in life, but that doesn't justify theft. many people on the net (Dare I say..Netizens `;^) seem to think that the advent of the internet is the advent of getting everything in the world for nothing. Sorry but I disagree.
Furthermore, it's a facet of the freedom of speech (another natural right)
You are confusing natural rights with positive rights. The former being something inherent to nature, the latter being something legislated or provided (which is what freedom of speech is, in the U.S. at least).
Eh, what? What I actually was saying (since you missed where I said that I didn't think that applied here) is that there are circumstances where it can be considered "right" (in the moral sense of the word) to break the law.
No I got that.
Natural Law (from encyclopedia.com) theory that some laws are fundamental to human nature.
The right to listen to a song I create is in NO WAY a fundamental to human nature. All rights are societal constructs created over years of "civilization". There is nothing fundamental about it.
I think you missed my point, what I was trying to say was that we have no inherent rights to any of these things. We only have the rights provided to us by Government (explicitly and implicitly:in the U.S. I mean). There is no law that says you have a "right" to the internet/tv/nicer car then the one I have etc..
If this seems confusing it's because I'm tired and am not thinking completely clearly. Sorry.
Net users (especially young people, who don't have a lot of money to spare)
Maybe they should spend less time on the net and more time at a job. Back in the Good Old Days(tm)(c)(r) (you know, the stone age like 10 years ago) I had to work so I could buy my favorite CD. Was that so bad? No. I think this is one problem in our country as kids are growing up with no work ethic. Life is so hard I have to download MP3's because I can't afford a $12 CD
So it is a natural right to listen to others peoples creations? Gee, that's funny I always considered it a privelege. Is television a natural right since the airwaves are free? Do any of societies creations really fall under "natural rights"? Marcus
You should opensource your sense of humor. That way our many eyes could fix all the bugs that make you completely miss the joke. Long Live PollMastah!!
No because Chuck D is about a gazillion times more intelligent than Lars and will make him look terrible. We should be fair after all and get someone who is at a similar level. Anyone know if Carrot Top is in favor of Napster?
These so-called "products" are intangible and therefore cannot be "owned" by anyone. They are simply data.
Then make them yourself. It's that simple. Don't rely on others if the product is so meaningless as to be called, "simple data".
Why should anyone be able to control anything because they created it? If I baked a cake and sold it to you would you accept that I have the absolute right to control where/when/how you consumed it and whether or not you shared it? I hope not.
You contradict yourself here. A cake is definitely not intangible. You don't pay for the "rights" of a cake you pay for the ingredients. Try again.
Creative people enjoy creating. It's a fundamental part of being human - it's what human beings do, a law of nature if you will. Do you ask what incentive an object has to fall to earth? No - it's a law of physics.
Not to get all post-modern but law of nature? You might as well argue that I have a natural right to a new car every year. I know many people who create things not because they love it, but because it gives them a paycheck. Try again.
A creation is essentially data that "belongs" to neither of us.
See my first point.
I'm not making any suggestions as to how anyone should make a living - that is their business. But consider that there are many other worthwhile activities that people could do but which are hard to make a living from (running a shelter for homeless people for example). Why do you take it as a universal truth that musicians, artists and authors have a right to a living from their activities? In my opinion there is no such right. In a free market system you make a living selling things that have value. If your creations have zero monetary value (that's not to say that e.g. a piece of music may not have a high artistic value) because they can be duplicated at virtually no cost then you must accept that you cannot make a living from selling them.
Just because something can be duplicated it loses value? Nothing has monetary value unless we say it does. If everyone wants my pants they are worth a lot more money than what they are currently worth (which is nothing except to me). Try again.
This is very true, most of the songs are either too obscene to be humorous (obscenities can be funny, just ask George Carlin but sometimes it is too much) or just not funny at all. Asshole Son (parody of Black Hole Sun) comes to mind. Not nearly as clever as Al, and it doesn't even sound like him.
I've been ripping my CDs recently. Some are badly damaged, and I replace the missing songs with downloads from Napster. Am I doing anything illegal, no.
I don't know maybe I'm way off base here, but it used to be when you owned something and it broke, if you had no warranty you are responsible for buying another one. E.G. If my serpentine belt broke in my car, I couldn't just go take one off another car, and I am not entitled to any replacement that I don't buy myself(my car is too old and crappy for a warranty:P).
My point being, if you didn't back up your discs or tapes that got damaged in the first place then you are probably SOL.
I agree 1 hundred percent. However I was responding to
I did check existing names. Pegasus Mail and pmail are not the same name, and only an idiot could confuse them.
If someone hits www.pmail.com (something people tend to do) they will think that pmail = pegasus mail. Therefore they could be easily confused. If that makes me an idiot then so be it, but do we really need another pmail anyway? Why didn't he call it improvmail or qcmail?
Slashdot Mirror
IBM dropped the ball on marketing.
SUN didn't make a desktop OS.
Apple screwed themselves when they fired Jobs.
That's not a monopoly thing, that's a business thing.
Marc p.s. if you would like to continue this discussion feel free to email me from here on I an dead tired.
Marc
By the way, I agree about CompUSA. They have the stupidest people I have ever seen as employees.
Marc
Hold on. We live in a free market society. Noone was FORCED anything. You always had a choice. You can't compare MS to AT&T. With AT&T there was truly NO choice. If I go and buy a Ford because there is a Ford dealership next door to my house, has Ford screwed me because they make shitty cars? No, I have screwed myself for not looking down the street at the Toyota/Mazda/Honda/Olds/Lexus/BMW dealerships.
I know I am not the average computer consumer. However I am the average car/dishwasher/carpet/furniture buyer. If I don't make an informed decision, and don't get the best for my value, I am an idiot (and I am because I owned a Taurus at one point `;^).
Marc
Marc
Win95 does not have integrated IE. 98 does but it can be removed with 98lite. 98 remains fully functional at this point. What does that mean? IE is integrated into the SHELL. 98lite replaces it with the win95 shell. 98lite is a free, small utility that runs quickly and effectively.
You could always buy a PC without windows on it, just not necessarily from Dell. But you have always had a choice. Even in 1995 small computer stores were everywhere, providing choice.
As to MS's practices with OEM's, no argument here.
Marcus
Come on now, Nazi's, foot worship, and pedophilia.
What more does anime need?
-Marc
The original post refered to college students.
Don't tell me you couldn't get a copy made, tapes were around 10 years ago. Also, please don't try and say that 'MP3s are different because they are digital'. Good 1/8" tape sounds better than 128k MP3. MP3 is a lossy format.
Agreed which is why I don't use MP3. Again please see the parent to my post so you can se why I made the argument I did.
Try $15-$17USD CD. Plus, the pirates have a point: The ability to afford it isn't the main point, the point is that it is overpriced. Look at the facts: A CD can't cost any more than about $1.00USD to make and that is counting the inserts. Also the artists don't get much either (how much depends on the artist but it is usually around $.50-$1.00USD). So where is all the money going? To the recording companies and to the stores. The middlemen in other words. Also, recording companies do have a monoply of sorts. If you want music from a given band, you are forced to buy it from a specific label and at the price they set. You have no option to get it for less from anyone else since that label owns all right to that music.
I buy CD's new for 12 dollars all the time, then again I live in Cleveland, hence a lower cost of living, and I know where to shop.
Marcus
Was your computer free? Is your electricity free?
You play into the hands of some very rich, arrogant, power-hungry people.
Do you have a car? If so you have done this. Do you own clothing from any store? If so you have done this. Do you ever eat fast food? If so you have done this. My point? I am no fan of the RIAA, I try to buy my CD's used as much as possible. Just because they are the scapegoats of the week however, I am not going to act like they are what's wrong with this country. You want to make the world a better place? Go work in a soup kitchen. Support the EZLN. Become a public school teacher in the inner city. Don't tell me that stealing from the rich and giving to yourself is some noble purpose that should be admired.
By the way, according to your email you are on roadrunner and YOU, my friend are playing into the hands of some very rich, arrogant, power-hungry people.
Marcus
The post I was responding too said they had the "natural right" to listen to any music I created whether I said they could or not. If I don't have the "natural right" to stop you from taking what is mine, you don't have the "natural right" to take it.
Marcus
Marcus
Marcus
It's no longer necessary to work? Amazing.
Times are a-changin', old fella. Go back to work and get over it.
I am 24 I hope I'm not an "old fella" yet. :-)
You have missed the point. A person who can afford to be on the net should be able to afford to buy a CD. End of story.
Marcus
You are confusing natural rights with positive rights. The former being something inherent to nature, the latter being something legislated or provided (which is what freedom of speech is, in the U.S. at least).
Marcus
Flame all you want, I'll post more.
No I got that.
Natural Law (from encyclopedia.com) theory that some laws are fundamental to human nature.
The right to listen to a song I create is in NO WAY a fundamental to human nature. All rights are societal constructs created over years of "civilization". There is nothing fundamental about it.
I think you missed my point, what I was trying to say was that we have no inherent rights to any of these things. We only have the rights provided to us by Government (explicitly and implicitly:in the U.S. I mean). There is no law that says you have a "right" to the internet/tv/nicer car then the one I have etc..
If this seems confusing it's because I'm tired and am not thinking completely clearly. Sorry.
Marcus
Flame all you want, I'll post more.
Maybe they should spend less time on the net and more time at a job. Back in the Good Old Days(tm)(c)(r) (you know, the stone age like 10 years ago) I had to work so I could buy my favorite CD. Was that so bad? No. I think this is one problem in our country as kids are growing up with no work ethic. Life is so hard I have to download MP3's because I can't afford a $12 CD
Get a job and get over it.
Marcus
Flame all you want, I'll post more.
So it is a natural right to listen to others peoples creations? Gee, that's funny I always considered it a privelege. Is television a natural right since the airwaves are free? Do any of societies creations really fall under "natural rights"?
Marcus
You should opensource your sense of humor. That way our many eyes could fix all the bugs that make you completely miss the joke.
Long Live PollMastah!!
No because Chuck D is about a gazillion times more intelligent than Lars and will make him look terrible.
We should be fair after all and get someone who is at a similar level. Anyone know if Carrot Top is in favor of Napster?
Then make them yourself. It's that simple. Don't rely on others if the product is so meaningless as to be called, "simple data".
Why should anyone be able to control anything because they created it? If I baked a cake and sold it to you would you accept that I have the absolute right to control where/when/how you consumed it and whether or not you shared it? I hope not.
You contradict yourself here. A cake is definitely not intangible. You don't pay for the "rights" of a cake you pay for the ingredients. Try again.
Creative people enjoy creating. It's a fundamental part of being human - it's what human beings do, a law of nature if you will. Do you ask what incentive an object has to fall to earth? No - it's a law of physics.
Not to get all post-modern but law of nature? You might as well argue that I have a natural right to a new car every year. I know many people who create things not because they love it, but because it gives them a paycheck. Try again.
A creation is essentially data that "belongs" to neither of us.
See my first point.
I'm not making any suggestions as to how anyone should make a living - that is their business. But consider that there are many other worthwhile activities that people could do but which are hard to make a living from (running a shelter for homeless people for example). Why do you take it as a universal truth that musicians, artists and authors have a right to a living from their activities? In my opinion there is no such right. In a free market system you make a living selling things that have value. If your creations have zero monetary value (that's not to say that e.g. a piece of music may not have a high artistic value) because they can be duplicated at virtually no cost then you must accept that you cannot make a living from selling them.
Just because something can be duplicated it loses value? Nothing has monetary value unless we say it does. If everyone wants my pants they are worth a lot more money than what they are currently worth (which is nothing except to me). Try again.
-Love,
Marc
Flame all you want, I'll post more.
Douglas Adams Made that point in one of the HH trilogy. I believe it's in Restaurant at the End of the Universe. -Marc
-Marc
I don't know maybe I'm way off base here, but it used to be when you owned something and it broke, if you had no warranty you are responsible for buying another one. E.G. If my serpentine belt broke in my car, I couldn't just go take one off another car, and I am not entitled to any replacement that I don't buy myself(my car is too old and crappy for a warranty :P).
My point being, if you didn't back up your discs or tapes that got damaged in the first place then you are probably SOL.
-Marc
I did check existing names. Pegasus Mail and pmail are not the same name, and only an idiot could confuse them.
If someone hits www.pmail.com (something people tend to do) they will think that pmail = pegasus mail. Therefore they could be easily confused. If that makes me an idiot then so be it, but do we really need another pmail anyway? Why didn't he call it improvmail or qcmail?
David Harris, Pegasus Mail (PMAIL4-DOM)
10 Beaumont Road
Dunedin,
NZ
Domain Name: PMAIL.COM
Administrative Contact, Technical Contact, Zone Contact:
Pierce, Steve (SP22) Steve@HDL.COM
HDL
1013 San Mateo SE
Albuquerque, NM 87108
(505) 262-8570
Billing Contact:
Fox, Steven (SF31) sfox@US1.NET
AIS, Inc.
PO Box 13150
Albuquerque, NM 87192-3150
505-299-7447 (FAX) 505-296-3754
Record last updated on 06-Apr-2000.
Record expires on 25-May-2005.
Record created on 24-May-1997.
Database last updated on 7-May-2000 01:55:29 EDT.
Domain servers in listed order:
NS1.US1.NET 205.214.92.249
NS2.IEX.NET 192.156.196.1
Pmail = Pegasus mail.
Guess I must be an idiot.