"There's a difference between pointing out that a lock can be picked and demonstrating in detail how to do it. Especially when the audience isn't limited to the owner of the lock."
Not legally, there isn't. I'll be giving a talk on exactly this subject in 6 weeks. Marc Tobias, a lawyer, has co-authored an extremely detailed book on picking, bypassing, and completely ignoring the security of Medeco Biaxial locks. Find a better analogy.
There are about 5 games I would have eventually bought if the demos hadn't convinced me that, contrary to reviews, they sucked donkey balls. And this is just in the last month. The game companies are better off bribing reviewers than risking the public finding out how shitty the games are via demos.
"So rather than say 'yay, Pink Floyd won!', we should be saying 'what the fuck did EMI think they were doing?'"
I have no doubt they fuck smaller bands in the ass on a daily basis. The only thing I'm surprised about here is that they thought they could do it to a band as huge as Floyd without seeing legal action.
IIRC, he promised not to introduce new taxes, and again IIRC, he did not. He did have to raise the rate of some existing taxes, but I'd say he kept his campaign promise to the letter if not to the spirit.
I do understand your point; it's similar to my stance against stealing music or software from people I know who create it. But there is a spectrum even here. While I (unlike most Slashdot commenters) consider piracy to be at least some form of theft, I don't consider blocking ads to be theft of any sort whatsoever. You do, and I get that. I've never visited Ars that I'm aware of, but I can certainly extend a hypothetical, and I can see that even if someone I knew and liked made a living off of ads, I'd still find some other way to support that person. Because fuck advertising and fuck marketers.
Nice try, Fred, but if they didn't want to use the world wide web's intentionally open architecture to share content with others for free, they wouldn't have put it up in the first place. Your mistake is in assuming that the web is there for people to make money. It's not.
I read the first paragraph, and determined from there that since Ken's initial premise (that the web is there for people to make money) was completely wrong, then there was no point reading the rest of his argument. People are going to lose jobs because they decided to go into marketing and find innovative new ways to trick other people into seeing their ads? My heart bleeds for you, Ken.
This doesn't affect me. Even if it did, Lost--the only good show on ABC even though the quality is slipping this season--is all over Usenet minutes after it airs. The days of the robber baron media are long gone and frankly I don't give a shit which giant corporation "wins."
Pfft, you kids and your shiny bleeding-edge gadgets. My PDP-11 works fine and I don't have to worry about losing all my data when I leave the program cassette on my dashboard like you do.
I imagine you would first have to move to Germany, then get a job at the University of Stuttgart. Then ask the German government for funding before someone reminds you that universities provide their own funding and usually don't require much justification for the research they choose to produce.
"Further, you don't pretend you didn't sample, you give credit where it's due."
Unless you're Timbaland, then you act like a little bitch and claim it was sampling AFTER you get busted. Which almost puts him in the same league as Vanilla Ice, who I don't think ever admitted to stealing Bowie's riff.
But I agree, sampling done right (giving credit where credit is due) is fine. Anything less is plagiarism.
Slashdot Mirror
"(In France, the executives would have gone to jail.)"
In China they would have been shot.
Guys, guys. Can't we all just agree that both republicans AND democrats suck?
"What exactly do you mean when you say "be held responsible"? Are you hoping for public executions? BP CEO's heak on a pike, maybe?"
I can't speak for the grandparent, but from where I'm sitting that would be a great start.
"For obvious reasons, the company is keeping tight-lipped on the specifics."
He really wants the one-day lead time that will give him over the first cracks.
"There's a difference between pointing out that a lock can be picked and demonstrating in detail how to do it. Especially when the audience isn't limited to the owner of the lock."
Not legally, there isn't. I'll be giving a talk on exactly this subject in 6 weeks. Marc Tobias, a lawyer, has co-authored an extremely detailed book on picking, bypassing, and completely ignoring the security of Medeco Biaxial locks. Find a better analogy.
There are about 5 games I would have eventually bought if the demos hadn't convinced me that, contrary to reviews, they sucked donkey balls. And this is just in the last month. The game companies are better off bribing reviewers than risking the public finding out how shitty the games are via demos.
"So rather than say 'yay, Pink Floyd won!', we should be saying 'what the fuck did EMI think they were doing?'"
I have no doubt they fuck smaller bands in the ass on a daily basis. The only thing I'm surprised about here is that they thought they could do it to a band as huge as Floyd without seeing legal action.
"Bush promised not to raise taxes and did anyway"
IIRC, he promised not to introduce new taxes, and again IIRC, he did not. He did have to raise the rate of some existing taxes, but I'd say he kept his campaign promise to the letter if not to the spirit.
I do understand your point; it's similar to my stance against stealing music or software from people I know who create it. But there is a spectrum even here. While I (unlike most Slashdot commenters) consider piracy to be at least some form of theft, I don't consider blocking ads to be theft of any sort whatsoever. You do, and I get that. I've never visited Ars that I'm aware of, but I can certainly extend a hypothetical, and I can see that even if someone I knew and liked made a living off of ads, I'd still find some other way to support that person. Because fuck advertising and fuck marketers.
"They get to define what they consider theft of their own content, do they not?"
They do not. Well, I guess they can claim whatever they want to, but laws and regulations define theft, not CEOs.
Nice try, Fred, but if they didn't want to use the world wide web's intentionally open architecture to share content with others for free, they wouldn't have put it up in the first place. Your mistake is in assuming that the web is there for people to make money. It's not.
"You're better off visiting Newegg, and reading user comments about the hardware."
You're even better off asking people you personally know, ever since those marketing fuckbags learned the joys of astroturfing and viral marketing.
You can OC it to 8GHz but then the aluminum melts all over your motherboard.
It wasn't funny the first time you posted it either.
I prefer to think of DRM as "Digital Rape Module."
"The game work again ... someday?"
It works right now for the people who had the crack last week.
Yeah, I get that too. "As a long-time troll, you are eligible to disable advertising!" My response: "Slashdot has advertising?"
I read the first paragraph, and determined from there that since Ken's initial premise (that the web is there for people to make money) was completely wrong, then there was no point reading the rest of his argument. People are going to lose jobs because they decided to go into marketing and find innovative new ways to trick other people into seeing their ads? My heart bleeds for you, Ken.
This doesn't affect me. Even if it did, Lost--the only good show on ABC even though the quality is slipping this season--is all over Usenet minutes after it airs. The days of the robber baron media are long gone and frankly I don't give a shit which giant corporation "wins."
Pfft, you kids and your shiny bleeding-edge gadgets. My PDP-11 works fine and I don't have to worry about losing all my data when I leave the program cassette on my dashboard like you do.
"Hacker group"
Nope.
I imagine you would first have to move to Germany, then get a job at the University of Stuttgart. Then ask the German government for funding before someone reminds you that universities provide their own funding and usually don't require much justification for the research they choose to produce.
"Further, you don't pretend you didn't sample, you give credit where it's due."
Unless you're Timbaland, then you act like a little bitch and claim it was sampling AFTER you get busted. Which almost puts him in the same league as Vanilla Ice, who I don't think ever admitted to stealing Bowie's riff.
But I agree, sampling done right (giving credit where credit is due) is fine. Anything less is plagiarism.
"Have you seen any of his movies?"
And if you (grandparent poster) haven't, I strongly urge you not to. They fucking suck. Michael Bay looks competent by comparison.
Was Uwe Boll not available?