When the RIAA member companies have a business model based on selling plastic discs with a restrictive license to play the music encoded on that disc, we say, your business model isn't my problem. I want to shift my music to other formats, so I can play it without the plastic disc. Or I don't want all the music on the disc, I just want a few songs and I want to pay a fraction of the full price.
It's nice a company has a business model, but a business model is not a law any other entity need respect or follow. For any company other than Apple, what is the response when lawyers are brought in to enforce a business model? Scorn, ridicule, contempt.
If you don't like the way the market is responsing to your business model, bring in the MBAs and change that model. Don't bring in the JDs and sue your customers.
Why is it OK for Apple to tell us how to use something after we've purchased it, when we don't accept that sort of guidance from other companies?
The movie industry spent a whole ton of money to develop the DVD. Is it OK for them to specifically state DVDs can only be used for viewing with approved DVD hardware, and cannot be used, for example, to rip the movie to a harddrive to be viewed later?
The music industry has a lot of money invested in CDs. Is it OK for them to specifically state CDs can only be used with approved CD hardware, and cannot be used, for example, to convert audio to another format?
Would there be any support if the company were any other than Apple? I buy, well license for personal use, your software; I pay your price. Now you try to dictate what hardware I use to run that software.
If this was any software company other than Apple, would accept the same restrictions?
Considering one of McCain's selling point is supposed to be experience, why does his campaign keep making rookie mistakes?
He repeatedly mentions his opponent by name in speeches and on his web site (why give the other guy free publicity?), he refers to the border between two countries which don't border each other, and now this.
It's not stupid because it isn't done, it's stupid because people will do it anyway. Supporters (not just McCain's) will cut-and-paste talking points from the candidate on their own. A program like this just makes them, and him, look like idiots.
Cops hear nothing but excuses all day long. People who pay full attention to the road and their own behavior are rare.
That's always been my thinking. I'm pretty good with awareness of my speed and the posted limit. What I wasn't good with was test driving the Highlander at night before buying. I didn't realize the tinted rear window makes it pretty much impossible for me to keep track of who is behind me in the dark.
But as one poster noted, a traffic stop is a little different. I have a right to walk down the street; I don't have a right to a drivers license. So here's another little ditty, just 'cause I feel like sharing.
This time it's the Mrs. and myself in our apartment unwinding after a long day. Some folks might have a beer in this situation. We prefer an alternative that, while less harmful than alcohol, is currently illegal to possess and consume.
So we're relaxing. It's about time to move things to the bedroom when a couple of the local finest knock on my door. They're responding to a noise complaint. Now unless our neighbors are hypersensitive to the sound of a bic lighter striking and water bubbling, we haven't made a sound that could be heard outside the apartment all evening.
I figure either they have the wrong address or they've been called as a prank. I suppose I could have responded as the OP suggested, and demanded to see my lawyer. That would have been within my rights, but again, would probably not be in my best interests.
I tell the fuzz I haven't been playing any loud music, and in fact haven't heard any thing of the sort all night. I guess it helped at that point the only sound coming from the apartment was the wife brushing her teeth.
As I respond to the gentleman's query, I step through the doorway, into the hall. I do not square my shoulders, put my hands on my hips, and strike my none-shall-pass pose. I simply walk to the pig as I would if a regular person had addressed me. I keep the focus in the hall. I can say 'no' if they ask to come in, but isn't it easier to keep them from asking?
I do know my rights. I know these guys aren't going into my apartment. But I also know I have nothing to gain by rubbing their noses in it. It's the difference between the smartest kid in class and the kid trying to make every one else feel dumb.
It's about awareness of your rights AND your surroundings. There are 'I ain't saying nuthin' til my lawyer gets here' moments. Those are bad moments, moments to be avoided. (Although not avoided at all costs.) Nothing to be gained by creating such a moment where one does not exist.
That said, I'm with the folks whose response to this thread is, 'I don't fly.' I'm in the USA, and I'll fly to Europe, I'll fly to Asia, but for staying in North America, I'm driving.
Remember your rights, refuse to answer questions, the only answer you should EVER give a police officer, or federal agent is "I want a lawyer."
That lawyer is an idiot, and you're an idiot if you follow his advice. I agree for many situations, such as when a police officer comes to my house, I step outside and close the door behind me. I do not invite the officer in.
But here's a scene based on actual events. First, how it happened:
[Late model SUV traveling 80 MPH down NJ Turnpike. Flashing red and blue lights from police car. SUV slows and stops on the road shoulder.]
State Cop: I've been trailing you for a while. You're passing a lot of cars. Do you know how fast you were going?
Me: About 80.
Cop: Why so fast?
Me: Just trying to get where I'm going.
Cop: And where is that?
Me: Visting friends in Mays Landing.
Cop: Wait here.
[State Cop walks back to his car. Cut to scene of cop returning.]
Cop: I'm giving you a ticket for failure to obey a posted sign--the speed limit sign. No points on your license. Call the number on the back of the summons for the amount of the fine. Here's the summons number you'll need when you call. Keep it under 70, and have a good evening.
How do you think that exchange would be different if the first words out of my mouth were, "I want a lawyer"? You think the cop would have said, "Oh, a citizen who knows his rights. Please sir, be on your way. Sorry for any inconvinience"?
I doubt it. Even if the cop couldn't come up with a reason to search my car, he could come back with, "Fine, let's go back to the station and wait for your lawyer." Of course, it being 11 PM Friday night, and me being from out of state and not knowing any lawyers in the area, it might have been a bit of a wait.
I've been in situations which had the potential for long stretches of PMITA prison, that I drove away from with a traffic summons or less. I'm guessing it doesn't hurt that I answer questions directly, give no indication I'd have any reason to say anything other than the truth, and leave the foil headgear out of sight.
Of course in the scene above, if the next question was, 'can I see what you have in back,' the conversation would have ended much differently. But he didn't go there, so there's no reason I needed to respond as if he had gone there.
There is a huge difference between the actions of the President and his band of thieves, and the minimally Democratic House and Senate.
Difference, yes. Huge? I don't know.
One poster used the example of lifting a pack of gum vs. robbing a bank. I think it's more along the lines of the guy in the bank who shoots the guard vs the guy in the bank who grabs the money but doesn't shoot vs the guy driving the getaway car.
Or maybe baseball is a better example. There are the players who cheated by taking steroids, then there is the league which followed a path of such deliberate ignorance and impotence you have to consider it just as guilty as the players.
This is one of those debates I find fun because pretty much everyone is wrong. If you're getting something for free that you normally have to pay for, how is that not illegal?
It's like the pennies in the tray at the cash register...
Not because he showed up their complete incompetence and made them look like fools and now they want retribution. Protecting the public's right to privacy - yes, that's the reason.
Obviously the real reason they're coming down heavy is the access to the payroll system.
When the system calculates withholding for taxes and such, there are these fractions of a penny left over. Usually the system just rounds the amounts, but what if he introduced code into the system to round all the amounts down and put the extra fractions into an account.
If this had gone the other way, not only would eBay be in trouble (especially after the loss of a similar case in France), but so would Net commerce as a whole.
How would Net commerce as a whole be in trouble if the ruling went against eBay?
That right there is the number 1 reason people drive rather than take public transit. (There are rationalizations related to scheduling, but that's what it really comes down to.) And that also leaves out another subtext, which is that the "poor people" they are usually thinking of are not white.
Well trolled. Bravo.
I see the other replies, but I'll add one more data point for the arguement against using public transit. In this case, it's not to avoid poor people, it's that we're too poor for public transit.
Sounds crazy, but I live in the suburbs of Boston. My wife works in downtown Boston, quite close to a major train station. When we first moved, she tried using the commuter rail for a few months.
The key word being COMMUTER, as in, scheduled for folks to go into the city in the morning and out of the city in the afternoon. Oh, and for folks who work 9 to 5 with no overtime and never any odd hours.
First she has to get to the train station. No buses available so she would drive. However the public parking at the train is a joke, so unless she takes the first train at 3 AM, she has to pay for parking. That was about $100/month.
Then there's the train. Monthly pass was about $190/month. But that was a few years ago; I'm sure it has gone up since. So that's $290/month for the train, when there's parking under her office building for $300/month.
Getting in to work is nice--driving to the station, waiting for the train, then walking from the train to the office takes only 15-20 minutes longer than the 60 minute drive, but she can use the time on the train to read, nap, etc.
It's getting back home where we hit the problem. There's a train at 5 PM. Another around 5:30, and one at 6. Then the next train is 8 PM. What happens when she has to work past the time to leave for the 6 PM train? She can sit around for 2 hours or take a cab home, at 30 bucks a pop.
Even with tolls, gas, extra wear on the car, driving in is less out of pocket than the train. With the boost of getting to set her own schedule.
Earth is virulently alive, it's thoroughly infested with life everywhere you look. It's quite possible that life found on, say, Mars would be a descendant of life from Earth: think bacterial spores riding a rock from impact ejecta.
But given life has so infested Earth, wouldn't we expect the same on Mars? Mars may have had life at some time in the past for which evidence is scarce, but if Mars has life now, shouldn't it be not only easy to find, but hard to miss?
Slashdot Mirror
Apple's business model is...
When the RIAA member companies have a business model based on selling plastic discs with a restrictive license to play the music encoded on that disc, we say, your business model isn't my problem. I want to shift my music to other formats, so I can play it without the plastic disc. Or I don't want all the music on the disc, I just want a few songs and I want to pay a fraction of the full price.
It's nice a company has a business model, but a business model is not a law any other entity need respect or follow. For any company other than Apple, what is the response when lawyers are brought in to enforce a business model? Scorn, ridicule, contempt.
If you don't like the way the market is responsing to your business model, bring in the MBAs and change that model. Don't bring in the JDs and sue your customers.
Why is it OK to break Apple's license?
Why is it OK for Apple to tell us how to use something after we've purchased it, when we don't accept that sort of guidance from other companies?
The movie industry spent a whole ton of money to develop the DVD. Is it OK for them to specifically state DVDs can only be used for viewing with approved DVD hardware, and cannot be used, for example, to rip the movie to a harddrive to be viewed later?
The music industry has a lot of money invested in CDs. Is it OK for them to specifically state CDs can only be used with approved CD hardware, and cannot be used, for example, to convert audio to another format?
Would there be any support if the company were any other than Apple? I buy, well license for personal use, your software; I pay your price. Now you try to dictate what hardware I use to run that software.
If this was any software company other than Apple, would accept the same restrictions?
Maybe after that you can poke him in the chest and say "what are you going to do about it?"
You forgot, "my taxes pay your sallary!"
They really like that one.
How many nerd points do I loose?
Some things are better than nerd points.
I wouldn't say it's missing it...
Considering one of McCain's selling point is supposed to be experience, why does his campaign keep making rookie mistakes?
He repeatedly mentions his opponent by name in speeches and on his web site (why give the other guy free publicity?), he refers to the border between two countries which don't border each other, and now this.
It's not stupid because it isn't done, it's stupid because people will do it anyway. Supporters (not just McCain's) will cut-and-paste talking points from the candidate on their own. A program like this just makes them, and him, look like idiots.
Cops hear nothing but excuses all day long. People who pay full attention to the road and their own behavior are rare.
That's always been my thinking. I'm pretty good with awareness of my speed and the posted limit. What I wasn't good with was test driving the Highlander at night before buying. I didn't realize the tinted rear window makes it pretty much impossible for me to keep track of who is behind me in the dark.
But as one poster noted, a traffic stop is a little different. I have a right to walk down the street; I don't have a right to a drivers license. So here's another little ditty, just 'cause I feel like sharing.
This time it's the Mrs. and myself in our apartment unwinding after a long day. Some folks might have a beer in this situation. We prefer an alternative that, while less harmful than alcohol, is currently illegal to possess and consume.
So we're relaxing. It's about time to move things to the bedroom when a couple of the local finest knock on my door. They're responding to a noise complaint. Now unless our neighbors are hypersensitive to the sound of a bic lighter striking and water bubbling, we haven't made a sound that could be heard outside the apartment all evening.
I figure either they have the wrong address or they've been called as a prank. I suppose I could have responded as the OP suggested, and demanded to see my lawyer. That would have been within my rights, but again, would probably not be in my best interests.
I tell the fuzz I haven't been playing any loud music, and in fact haven't heard any thing of the sort all night. I guess it helped at that point the only sound coming from the apartment was the wife brushing her teeth.
As I respond to the gentleman's query, I step through the doorway, into the hall. I do not square my shoulders, put my hands on my hips, and strike my none-shall-pass pose. I simply walk to the pig as I would if a regular person had addressed me. I keep the focus in the hall. I can say 'no' if they ask to come in, but isn't it easier to keep them from asking?
I do know my rights. I know these guys aren't going into my apartment. But I also know I have nothing to gain by rubbing their noses in it. It's the difference between the smartest kid in class and the kid trying to make every one else feel dumb.
It's about awareness of your rights AND your surroundings. There are 'I ain't saying nuthin' til my lawyer gets here' moments. Those are bad moments, moments to be avoided. (Although not avoided at all costs.) Nothing to be gained by creating such a moment where one does not exist.
That said, I'm with the folks whose response to this thread is, 'I don't fly.' I'm in the USA, and I'll fly to Europe, I'll fly to Asia, but for staying in North America, I'm driving.
Remember your rights, refuse to answer questions, the only answer you should EVER give a police officer, or federal agent is "I want a lawyer."
That lawyer is an idiot, and you're an idiot if you follow his advice. I agree for many situations, such as when a police officer comes to my house, I step outside and close the door behind me. I do not invite the officer in.
But here's a scene based on actual events. First, how it happened:
[Late model SUV traveling 80 MPH down NJ Turnpike. Flashing red and blue lights from police car. SUV slows and stops on the road shoulder.]
State Cop: I've been trailing you for a while. You're passing a lot of cars. Do you know how fast you were going?
Me: About 80.
Cop: Why so fast?
Me: Just trying to get where I'm going.
Cop: And where is that?
Me: Visting friends in Mays Landing.
Cop: Wait here.
[State Cop walks back to his car. Cut to scene of cop returning.]
Cop: I'm giving you a ticket for failure to obey a posted sign--the speed limit sign. No points on your license. Call the number on the back of the summons for the amount of the fine. Here's the summons number you'll need when you call. Keep it under 70, and have a good evening.
How do you think that exchange would be different if the first words out of my mouth were, "I want a lawyer"? You think the cop would have said, "Oh, a citizen who knows his rights. Please sir, be on your way. Sorry for any inconvinience"?
I doubt it. Even if the cop couldn't come up with a reason to search my car, he could come back with, "Fine, let's go back to the station and wait for your lawyer." Of course, it being 11 PM Friday night, and me being from out of state and not knowing any lawyers in the area, it might have been a bit of a wait.
I've been in situations which had the potential for long stretches of PMITA prison, that I drove away from with a traffic summons or less. I'm guessing it doesn't hurt that I answer questions directly, give no indication I'd have any reason to say anything other than the truth, and leave the foil headgear out of sight.
Of course in the scene above, if the next question was, 'can I see what you have in back,' the conversation would have ended much differently. But he didn't go there, so there's no reason I needed to respond as if he had gone there.
Is "I'm sitting on [x]" used in the US or UK as a way of saying that you own/use [x] at all?
Yes, for [x] == chair, bench, bean bag, younger brother, etc.
There is a huge difference between the actions of the President and his band of thieves, and the minimally Democratic House and Senate.
Difference, yes. Huge? I don't know.
One poster used the example of lifting a pack of gum vs. robbing a bank. I think it's more along the lines of the guy in the bank who shoots the guard vs the guy in the bank who grabs the money but doesn't shoot vs the guy driving the getaway car.
Or maybe baseball is a better example. There are the players who cheated by taking steroids, then there is the league which followed a path of such deliberate ignorance and impotence you have to consider it just as guilty as the players.
Yes, the House and Senate are somewhat complicit
Is that like being somewhat pregnant?
http://www.flmnh.ufl.edu/fish/education/questions/Biology.html#birth
Fish generally don't copulate like mammals, but instead the female lays eggs and the male then ejaculates on the eggs.
There are sharks which give birth to baby sharks, not eggs.
I presume there's some sort of shark sex involved.
This is one of those debates I find fun because pretty much everyone is wrong. If you're getting something for free that you normally have to pay for, how is that not illegal?
It's like the pennies in the tray at the cash register...
That being said, organization breeds efficiency
There's a documentary on that very subject you should see.
It's called Office Space
Underrated and overrated should be meta-moddable
They are. I today just had an overrated meta-modded as unfair.
I'm kind of tired of doing a search for designer suits and finding page after page of obvious Chinese-made ripoffs.
Really?
Do you complain about the lack of designer suits at garage sales and flea markets, too? Because that's all eBay is, just a big yard sale online.
Not to excuse the knock offs and counterfeits, but why are you looking for designer suits on eBay?
How horrible... that's like taking pennies from crippled children!
That's the jar. This is the tray. Only, instead of a penny, it's only a fraction of a penny.
Not because he showed up their complete incompetence and made them look like fools and now they want retribution. Protecting the public's right to privacy - yes, that's the reason.
Obviously the real reason they're coming down heavy is the access to the payroll system.
When the system calculates withholding for taxes and such, there are these fractions of a penny left over. Usually the system just rounds the amounts, but what if he introduced code into the system to round all the amounts down and put the extra fractions into an account.
How many bosses do you think this guy had?
If this had gone the other way, not only would eBay be in trouble (especially after the loss of a similar case in France), but so would Net commerce as a whole.
How would Net commerce as a whole be in trouble if the ruling went against eBay?
That right there is the number 1 reason people drive rather than take public transit. (There are rationalizations related to scheduling, but that's what it really comes down to.) And that also leaves out another subtext, which is that the "poor people" they are usually thinking of are not white.
Well trolled. Bravo.
I see the other replies, but I'll add one more data point for the arguement against using public transit. In this case, it's not to avoid poor people, it's that we're too poor for public transit.
Sounds crazy, but I live in the suburbs of Boston. My wife works in downtown Boston, quite close to a major train station. When we first moved, she tried using the commuter rail for a few months.
The key word being COMMUTER, as in, scheduled for folks to go into the city in the morning and out of the city in the afternoon. Oh, and for folks who work 9 to 5 with no overtime and never any odd hours.
First she has to get to the train station. No buses available so she would drive. However the public parking at the train is a joke, so unless she takes the first train at 3 AM, she has to pay for parking. That was about $100/month.
Then there's the train. Monthly pass was about $190/month. But that was a few years ago; I'm sure it has gone up since. So that's $290/month for the train, when there's parking under her office building for $300/month.
Getting in to work is nice--driving to the station, waiting for the train, then walking from the train to the office takes only 15-20 minutes longer than the 60 minute drive, but she can use the time on the train to read, nap, etc.
It's getting back home where we hit the problem. There's a train at 5 PM. Another around 5:30, and one at 6. Then the next train is 8 PM. What happens when she has to work past the time to leave for the 6 PM train? She can sit around for 2 hours or take a cab home, at 30 bucks a pop.
Even with tolls, gas, extra wear on the car, driving in is less out of pocket than the train. With the boost of getting to set her own schedule.
For reference's sake...
I'd mod you up, but I can't find "+1 Get off my lawn"
If I end up as the last male on the planet and must single handedly repopulate the planet...
If you're doing it single handedly, you're not going to produce much of a repopulation.
Earth is virulently alive, it's thoroughly infested with life everywhere you look. It's quite possible that life found on, say, Mars would be a descendant of life from Earth: think bacterial spores riding a rock from impact ejecta.
But given life has so infested Earth, wouldn't we expect the same on Mars? Mars may have had life at some time in the past for which evidence is scarce, but if Mars has life now, shouldn't it be not only easy to find, but hard to miss?
AKA,
I have a couple mod points. Let me know which posts need to be unabused, and I'll mod you up.
Wait...what?