Why would we want dirty manufacturing and industry in the US??
Jobs. Further, manufacturing doesn't have to be "dirty". Its just that most companies are lazy and cheap, and would rather turn some 3rd world country into a shithole than invest in clean manufacturing.
In addition, I'm sorry to say, but not everyone is cut out for white collar or knowledge work. There are a lot of people who's main skill is their brawn.
Admiration is nice, but sadly it doesn't usually pay the bills. While I'd definitely be flattered if someone copied one of my designs and it got mega popular, if I don't get money from it, it doesn't really help me. I still have to eat.
Fuck corporate America. They're the assholes that started the entire mess. Why should we be licking their balls to get them to stay?
I'm seriously sick of this "Oh, they're being hostile to business!" bullshit that comes up whenever someone tries to criticize businesses for being assholes.
By denying US citizens such education, you only reinforce the anti-intellectualism that you complain about.
You're gonna have to actually prove that such education is "denied" to US Citizens. You're going to have to show the rates of US Citizens that want to to go grad school, but are refused in favor of foreign students.
Wouldn't matter. The numbers of US citizens (which include many people of Asian descent, so stop with the racism/exclusion) who are interested in getting into Grad School is still far, far lower, meaning you'd still have huge numbers of foreign students.
And the only thing I can find wrong with that is the fact that US students aren't that much interested in getting graduate degrees anymore.
1). Quit being a xenophobic dick. It's really unbecoming.
2). They are taking those slots because not enough US students want them. Get US students more interested in grad work (read: Make it pay better, and make it more glamorous), and they will.
1). It says that the iBooks Author program can export to PDF.
2). WHY? PDF is an awful format for reading, especially on a device where the orientation can change. PDFs do not reflow text when the layout changes. And you can mark and annotate stuff on most other ebook formats just fine.
If it was solely text, then maybe you'd be right. But adding in images, video, and other interactive content, that means that e-ink is out. Maybe Pixel Qi, but those screens haven't really taken off yet.
Then the person that created the work, that actually put the effort into making it real, gets fucked over. And that is exactly what roman_mir wants to happen. He has absolutely no problem with artists getting fucked over, as long as someone can make a profit.
You come to my house to rob me, I must do what I can to stop you, this includes having home security of one kind or another. For some people it may mean paying a private security company, to others it may mean having a gun handy and to me maybe it means both.
And if I have more guns, and more muscle? Does that mean that not only am I in the right to take your stuff, but that you have no recourse?
What does that do to protect you against a robbery? A 911 call is just a phone number, it can as well be a private security call from your phone or home security communicator, whatever. Some security communicators are better than others, and they all go to private security firms anyway.
And if I can't afford private security? What happens then?
The difference from what I am saying and what you keep misunderstanding (and you have an agenda, you wouldn't be leaving over half of the comments in this thread and other threads I have on this topic) is that when government gets itself all powers - from legislative, to judicial, it takes over your rights completely by these branches of government eventually coordinating the attack upon your liberties, and that is what happened in US (and many other countries).
I'm not misunderstanding it at all. I'm simply not buying your bullshit.
And I like how you answer the fact that you have no way to prove that private security would actually be affordable by going of on random tangents about McVeigh and other unrelated, conspiratorial bullshit.
The fact of the matter is, you are completely wrong regarding your views on government. But you know what? If you believe in them that much, why don't you go somewhere and put those views into action? Why don't you prove us all wrong. Clearly, according to your posts, such a country would rise to being an economic superpower within a very short time. It's a far, far better course of action than forcing all of the rest of us to go along with your bullshit.
Think about what you're saying for just a second. You've essentially said that I can come over to your house and take all your stuff, and as long as I have more guns and muscle, I should be completely allowed to. It should be my right, even. Because you have nothing to protect your property.
And you have absolutely no proof whatsoever that "private security" would 1). Actually be affordable to most people, especially because you also apparently believe that government should not protect people from abuses by employers, or 2). That they would actually protect the people, and not abuse their power themselves. You only have, "Well, I really hope this would happen!"
Your problem is that you think that people don't deserve protection. You think that only the rich deserve to have their property rights enforced, as well.
Further, you think that, just because you don't like the terms I've put my content out under, that allows you to simply ignore those terms, and enjoy the fruits of my labor anyway. Essentially, you are in favor of slavery.
Sorry, you've basically just said that government only exists to protect people from government. Which is a laughably absurd idea. Government exists to protect people from other people.
However the implication of the AC I replied to was that he could not make money by selling his content without copyright laws
And he was right. At the very least, you did not prove him wrong. Louis C.K.'s performance is still very much copyrighted. He just hasn't put technological measures or encryption on it to stop people. If you tried selling it as yourself, you would quickly find yourself on the wrong end of a lawsuit.
Louis C.K. showed that he can make money by selling his original content without resorting to any of the government protection schemes.
No, he didn't. He showed that he can make money by selling is content without resorting to any of the TECHNOLOGICAL protection schemes.
Further, in your "no copyright" utopia, do you honestly think that content would not be DRMed to fuck? Do you honestly think that everyone would release their content with no protection?
Slashdot Mirror
Why would we want dirty manufacturing and industry in the US??
Jobs. Further, manufacturing doesn't have to be "dirty". Its just that most companies are lazy and cheap, and would rather turn some 3rd world country into a shithole than invest in clean manufacturing.
In addition, I'm sorry to say, but not everyone is cut out for white collar or knowledge work. There are a lot of people who's main skill is their brawn.
Admiration is nice, but sadly it doesn't usually pay the bills. While I'd definitely be flattered if someone copied one of my designs and it got mega popular, if I don't get money from it, it doesn't really help me. I still have to eat.
Fuck corporate America. They're the assholes that started the entire mess. Why should we be licking their balls to get them to stay?
I'm seriously sick of this "Oh, they're being hostile to business!" bullshit that comes up whenever someone tries to criticize businesses for being assholes.
By denying US citizens such education, you only reinforce the anti-intellectualism that you complain about.
You're gonna have to actually prove that such education is "denied" to US Citizens. You're going to have to show the rates of US Citizens that want to to go grad school, but are refused in favor of foreign students.
There are other criteria for admissions than just cash.
And citizenship should NOT be one of them.
Basically what you said is, "Make the US like China."
No thanks.
Wouldn't matter. The numbers of US citizens (which include many people of Asian descent, so stop with the racism/exclusion) who are interested in getting into Grad School is still far, far lower, meaning you'd still have huge numbers of foreign students.
And the only thing I can find wrong with that is the fact that US students aren't that much interested in getting graduate degrees anymore.
1). Quit being a xenophobic dick. It's really unbecoming.
2). They are taking those slots because not enough US students want them. Get US students more interested in grad work (read: Make it pay better, and make it more glamorous), and they will.
What the fuck are you talking about? You just gave what happens in the situation where copyright is abolished.
I think you're vastly underestimating there.
Unless of course that $15 is per student per year.
As opposed to current textbooks that are not? Especially in college?
I was disappointed to find out that I am unable to share a book I bought on my Kindle Fire with my wife because the publisher doesn't allow it.
This information was available to you before you bought the book. You decided not to do your research.
With an eBook with DRM, they'll make it so while the book might not cost $45, every student will be forced to buy it 'new' every year.
So? That's still assloads cheaper than most "used" textbooks.
1). It says that the iBooks Author program can export to PDF.
2). WHY? PDF is an awful format for reading, especially on a device where the orientation can change. PDFs do not reflow text when the layout changes. And you can mark and annotate stuff on most other ebook formats just fine.
How many publishers actually use Libre Office?
Do we really want Apple adding 30% to the cost of text books.
When they limit the cost of those textbooks to $15, absolutely.
What the hell does an iPad do that cheaper full fledged computers haven't been able to do for ages?
It's a lot more convenient to carry around, and a lot more comfortable to read books on.
No. You're trying to say that if every single student doesn't use this, then it's worthless. That assertion is absurd on its face.
If it was solely text, then maybe you'd be right. But adding in images, video, and other interactive content, that means that e-ink is out. Maybe Pixel Qi, but those screens haven't really taken off yet.
Then the person that created the work, that actually put the effort into making it real, gets fucked over. And that is exactly what roman_mir wants to happen. He has absolutely no problem with artists getting fucked over, as long as someone can make a profit.
You come to my house to rob me, I must do what I can to stop you, this includes having home security of one kind or another. For some people it may mean paying a private security company, to others it may mean having a gun handy and to me maybe it means both.
And if I have more guns, and more muscle? Does that mean that not only am I in the right to take your stuff, but that you have no recourse?
What does that do to protect you against a robbery? A 911 call is just a phone number, it can as well be a private security call from your phone or home security communicator, whatever. Some security communicators are better than others, and they all go to private security firms anyway.
And if I can't afford private security? What happens then?
The difference from what I am saying and what you keep misunderstanding (and you have an agenda, you wouldn't be leaving over half of the comments in this thread and other threads I have on this topic) is that when government gets itself all powers - from legislative, to judicial, it takes over your rights completely by these branches of government eventually coordinating the attack upon your liberties, and that is what happened in US (and many other countries).
I'm not misunderstanding it at all. I'm simply not buying your bullshit.
And I like how you answer the fact that you have no way to prove that private security would actually be affordable by going of on random tangents about McVeigh and other unrelated, conspiratorial bullshit.
The fact of the matter is, you are completely wrong regarding your views on government. But you know what? If you believe in them that much, why don't you go somewhere and put those views into action? Why don't you prove us all wrong. Clearly, according to your posts, such a country would rise to being an economic superpower within a very short time. It's a far, far better course of action than forcing all of the rest of us to go along with your bullshit.
Think about what you're saying for just a second. You've essentially said that I can come over to your house and take all your stuff, and as long as I have more guns and muscle, I should be completely allowed to. It should be my right, even. Because you have nothing to protect your property.
And you have absolutely no proof whatsoever that "private security" would 1). Actually be affordable to most people, especially because you also apparently believe that government should not protect people from abuses by employers, or 2). That they would actually protect the people, and not abuse their power themselves. You only have, "Well, I really hope this would happen!"
Your problem is that you think that people don't deserve protection. You think that only the rich deserve to have their property rights enforced, as well.
Further, you think that, just because you don't like the terms I've put my content out under, that allows you to simply ignore those terms, and enjoy the fruits of my labor anyway. Essentially, you are in favor of slavery.
Sorry, you've basically just said that government only exists to protect people from government. Which is a laughably absurd idea. Government exists to protect people from other people.
There are no good governments
Completely subjective statement.
Irrelevant. If such a thing happened, Barnes and igNoble could be sued out of existence.
However the implication of the AC I replied to was that he could not make money by selling his content without copyright laws
And he was right. At the very least, you did not prove him wrong. Louis C.K.'s performance is still very much copyrighted. He just hasn't put technological measures or encryption on it to stop people. If you tried selling it as yourself, you would quickly find yourself on the wrong end of a lawsuit.
Louis C.K. showed that he can make money by selling his original content without resorting to any of the government protection schemes.
No, he didn't. He showed that he can make money by selling is content without resorting to any of the TECHNOLOGICAL protection schemes.
Further, in your "no copyright" utopia, do you honestly think that content would not be DRMed to fuck? Do you honestly think that everyone would release their content with no protection?