One can't, ofcourse, refute a myth with documentation. Thats pretty hard.
On the other hand, I, personally, HAVE NEVER NEEDED more than 740kB of memory... Except to run m$ware...
Yeh that whole letting the participants in a market have a say about the price point of what they purchase is a real bastard! Especially with goods that require no transportation cost, no its much much better that we keep paying the conglomorates to tell us how/where/and how much we have to pay for content -- even if its a 200 year old Bach symphony recorded 60 years ago by a symphonic company that no longer exists but whose Copyrights were bought by Sony/MG after they immasculated the vynil market that used to keep that record company afloat. No no, lets never ever change that paradigm. Everyone is winning by it after all -- the lawyers, the CEOs and the politician... If its this broke why fix it?
Oh my bad. Ofcourse, the recording industry is really careful about who they sue, and they wouldn't go throwing their weight around just because they're big and ugly enough! No no, they just have all those lawyers on hand because they are such FANTASTIC content producers! Law&Order anyone?
man you have problems. If you spend 3 years of your life writing music, your stupid, enough said. Oh and by the way are you going to pay royalties to the people who created the software that allowed to make all those electronic loops??
Or for every email you've ever sent?
Or for every TCP/IP connection you ever made?
Go create something interesting, wait 100+ years and if people are still interested in it I might just swing to your argument a tiny tiny little bit
20 bucks says if you do give it away, and fail to get stringent copyrights over it, the MP/RIAA will take copyright over it, distribute it over their channels and sue you for having the gall to produce something outside the strict control of some lawyer (oh yeh cause lawyers are AWESOME content producers).
Nice troll you have going though, MPIAA paying well?
P.S. I haven't paid for content for years, then again I give software away:)
I don't think the implication is that a company cannot make their ODF 'browser' (read office app) particular. In fact what we want is competition among the ODF browser/editor vendors. What we don't want is one vendor crippling the market for all the others due to non-compliant features - such that an ODF document can no longer be edited by a different ODF browser/editor - brought in over time and on the back of a monopoly position.
Hope that clears things up:)
What you are talking about, redistribution of content, is completely absurd! If you DO have authorization to, say download and use a file, and your are getting said file from a computer network that you are not directly an IP address of - then more than likely chances are said file will be cached at a lot of places before it gets to you. These caches are NOT AUTHORISED to redistribute content to you!! In other words walk down to a "real" shop, who have gained AUTHORIZATION at every step in the distribution chain and then wait for it there...
In the world of 1's and 0's your argument is entirely one sided and erroneous. Let these "copyright holders" pay for the distribution through the web of their content (ISPs, TELCOs, exchanges, taxes, etc, etc) then what you say may, just may, be valid. Until then why should they be able to illegaly distribute content and not me!
I for one would be very glad to see ALL citizens of Israel sue their own government. Even better would be for that government to expend immense resources in seeking the gratification of a few desert dwellers, that would be sweet. BUT, lets just look at the chicken and the egg shall we. Palestine is an OCCUPIED territory, not an independent nation state!! Also, with scant resources they've forced the Isreali/US peoples to expend HUGE resources (i mean lazer to deal a few home made rockets!??!!?) in justified they're occupation and utter indolence in respect to the peoples they've occupied and let rot.
On the other hand, very few Israelis, especially living in the outer occupied territories, were even born there (or anywhere near ther) and thier CHOSEN indifference to anybody else in the world is legendary.
So, in conclusion, sue the government, please, sue them to bankruptcy if at all possible.
On an end note, I personally have long believed (since I was child and had no nothing that Isrealis were overwhelmingly jewish, just people who oppress others) that Isreal is an untenable state, its constitution is appaling where non-jewish citizens are concerned and a people who have emmerged from one of the worst abuses of humanity, only to learn that lesson so well as to immediatly start applying the same abuse upon another, equally underserving, people - are nothing to be held in esteem, but quite the contrary
I have written several for a number of different companies. Guess what!?!?! I designed, coded, tested and QA'd it all my self. I got paid a wage, no more!
Maybe if your company produces a peice of software and the first person to buy it starts giving it away your company has a really really really bad marketing department! And is too lazy to do customer relationship management. People don't just start using stuff that is given away you know. There's still something called REPUTATION out there. And it matters.
I'd really love to know who is auditing Greenpeace for "green" standards!
Greenpeace has existed for around 30 years, pollutions has increased markedly in those 30 years, is Greenpeace doing anything at all!!
What the world needs is personal accountability not more self serving lobby groups( particularly ones that fly people all over the world to tell other people( who didn't fly to hear it) why they're so harmful to the environment.
I think two issues/paradigms are being confused.
i) Violence
ii) Competition
"games" seem like stylized field warfare because the desired outcome is the vanquishing of one competitor by the other.
REAL field warfare quite often is not so decisive!! And who would want to play a game that one cannot ever come to satisfactory conclusion on, because we have to be so careful about the politics inherent in the "game"??
When you set up an oppositionist outcome, as in most computer games;i.e. I win, U lose, the persuance of that outcome can ALWAYS be portraied as violence. i.e. Lets say the characters in the "game" were two businesses. Say Microsoft and IBM as examples that have no connection to the real world. The object of the game is to get all the available business in a predefined and fixed pool. What ever one does, marketing startegies/sales-pipelines/etc, could be construed as "doing violence" to the other business's ability to operate.
Finally, I think the research was a COMPLETE waste of everyones time. Sure we all had a great time refuting the assumptions and outcomes, but why is the world wasting the resources of so highly accomplished a person as a Harvad professor (*gag*) on so pathetic a topic!!! POLITICS POLITICS POLITICS.
PS - to the researcher -- how bout working on coming up with better video games, rather than playing them and not even being able to enjoy it because your too busy counting violent instances??
BTW i think academics are the scapegoats, cause we all love to question thier unflinching sense of self-importance....
Slashdot Mirror
Sweet! that would catch all the MS trolls 2 :)
One can't, ofcourse, refute a myth with documentation. Thats pretty hard. On the other hand, I, personally, HAVE NEVER NEEDED more than 740kB of memory ... Except to run m$ware...
Yeh that whole letting the participants in a market have a say about the price point of what they purchase is a real bastard! Especially with goods that require no transportation cost, no its much much better that we keep paying the conglomorates to tell us how/where/and how much we have to pay for content -- even if its a 200 year old Bach symphony recorded 60 years ago by a symphonic company that no longer exists but whose Copyrights were bought by Sony/MG after they immasculated the vynil market that used to keep that record company afloat. No no, lets never ever change that paradigm. Everyone is winning by it after all -- the lawyers, the CEOs and the politician... If its this broke why fix it?
Oh my bad. Ofcourse, the recording industry is really careful about who they sue, and they wouldn't go throwing their weight around just because they're big and ugly enough! No no, they just have all those lawyers on hand because they are such FANTASTIC content producers! Law&Order anyone?
man you have problems. If you spend 3 years of your life writing music, your stupid, enough said. Oh and by the way are you going to pay royalties to the people who created the software that allowed to make all those electronic loops?? Or for every email you've ever sent? Or for every TCP/IP connection you ever made? Go create something interesting, wait 100+ years and if people are still interested in it I might just swing to your argument a tiny tiny little bit
20 bucks says if you do give it away, and fail to get stringent copyrights over it, the MP/RIAA will take copyright over it, distribute it over their channels and sue you for having the gall to produce something outside the strict control of some lawyer (oh yeh cause lawyers are AWESOME content producers). Nice troll you have going though, MPIAA paying well? P.S. I haven't paid for content for years, then again I give software away :)
I don't think the implication is that a company cannot make their ODF 'browser' (read office app) particular. In fact what we want is competition among the ODF browser/editor vendors. What we don't want is one vendor crippling the market for all the others due to non-compliant features - such that an ODF document can no longer be edited by a different ODF browser/editor - brought in over time and on the back of a monopoly position. Hope that clears things up :)
And you say this because those people who currently run the world I live in do such a wonderful wonderful job, right?
What you are talking about, redistribution of content, is completely absurd! If you DO have authorization to, say download and use a file, and your are getting said file from a computer network that you are not directly an IP address of - then more than likely chances are said file will be cached at a lot of places before it gets to you. These caches are NOT AUTHORISED to redistribute content to you!! In other words walk down to a "real" shop, who have gained AUTHORIZATION at every step in the distribution chain and then wait for it there... In the world of 1's and 0's your argument is entirely one sided and erroneous. Let these "copyright holders" pay for the distribution through the web of their content (ISPs, TELCOs, exchanges, taxes, etc, etc) then what you say may, just may, be valid. Until then why should they be able to illegaly distribute content and not me!
I for one would be very glad to see ALL citizens of Israel sue their own government. Even better would be for that government to expend immense resources in seeking the gratification of a few desert dwellers, that would be sweet. BUT, lets just look at the chicken and the egg shall we. Palestine is an OCCUPIED territory, not an independent nation state!! Also, with scant resources they've forced the Isreali/US peoples to expend HUGE resources (i mean lazer to deal a few home made rockets!??!!?) in justified they're occupation and utter indolence in respect to the peoples they've occupied and let rot. On the other hand, very few Israelis, especially living in the outer occupied territories, were even born there (or anywhere near ther) and thier CHOSEN indifference to anybody else in the world is legendary. So, in conclusion, sue the government, please, sue them to bankruptcy if at all possible. On an end note, I personally have long believed (since I was child and had no nothing that Isrealis were overwhelmingly jewish, just people who oppress others) that Isreal is an untenable state, its constitution is appaling where non-jewish citizens are concerned and a people who have emmerged from one of the worst abuses of humanity, only to learn that lesson so well as to immediatly start applying the same abuse upon another, equally underserving, people - are nothing to be held in esteem, but quite the contrary
I have written several for a number of different companies. Guess what!?!?! I designed, coded, tested and QA'd it all my self. I got paid a wage, no more! Maybe if your company produces a peice of software and the first person to buy it starts giving it away your company has a really really really bad marketing department! And is too lazy to do customer relationship management. People don't just start using stuff that is given away you know. There's still something called REPUTATION out there. And it matters.
I'd really love to know who is auditing Greenpeace for "green" standards! Greenpeace has existed for around 30 years, pollutions has increased markedly in those 30 years, is Greenpeace doing anything at all!! What the world needs is personal accountability not more self serving lobby groups( particularly ones that fly people all over the world to tell other people( who didn't fly to hear it) why they're so harmful to the environment.
I think two issues/paradigms are being confused. i) Violence ii) Competition "games" seem like stylized field warfare because the desired outcome is the vanquishing of one competitor by the other. REAL field warfare quite often is not so decisive!! And who would want to play a game that one cannot ever come to satisfactory conclusion on, because we have to be so careful about the politics inherent in the "game"?? When you set up an oppositionist outcome, as in most computer games;i.e. I win, U lose, the persuance of that outcome can ALWAYS be portraied as violence. i.e. Lets say the characters in the "game" were two businesses. Say Microsoft and IBM as examples that have no connection to the real world. The object of the game is to get all the available business in a predefined and fixed pool. What ever one does, marketing startegies/sales-pipelines/etc, could be construed as "doing violence" to the other business's ability to operate. Finally, I think the research was a COMPLETE waste of everyones time. Sure we all had a great time refuting the assumptions and outcomes, but why is the world wasting the resources of so highly accomplished a person as a Harvad professor (*gag*) on so pathetic a topic!!! POLITICS POLITICS POLITICS. PS - to the researcher -- how bout working on coming up with better video games, rather than playing them and not even being able to enjoy it because your too busy counting violent instances?? BTW i think academics are the scapegoats, cause we all love to question thier unflinching sense of self-importance....