I'm with you. I use an 80GB Neuros II. I have about 1000 CD's I've ripped and I've about about 150 CD's worth of good stuff from eMusic.com. Who has time to waste on DRM?
Everyone around here seems to forget that there are a lot of companies that provide enterprise support for Linux, including RedHat (it's their primary source of revenue), IBM, and a whole bunch of others I don't even know about.
Switching to Linux does not mean you are faced with only "informal" tech support on the Web (which is usually pretty darn good from my experience), it simply means you pay for a support contract with one of the companies that provide it, and you still are much better off financially.
As has been stated many times, Linux isn't going to replace the Windows desktop for the average user... yet. But it could for a reasonably motivated user, and I would seriously look at it for the server room (The idea of running Exchange scares the crap out of me... on the other hand, I've had good experience with SQL Server).
But if you guys would rather sit around and call each other rude names like a bunch of eighth-graders, by all means, don't let me stop you.
p.s. I just switched to Ubuntu on my primary home machine. My 13th Level Fighter will totally kick your butt, so I am the supreme Linux h4x0r!
Re: Blocking bad ads is fine, but ad blockers don'
Then I guess they need to find a new business model. The biggest misconception companies have is that they have a right to be successful, and the RIAA members are the worst offenders.
If ads don't work and pay-per-view doesn't work, find another job.
You remind me of those people who seem to think that by watching TV or reading a Web site, we are entering into some kind of implied contract with the provider of the content. This is not so. It is a business arrangement between the ad seller and the ad buyer.
If the ad buyer is so clueless as to make advertisements that offend, annoy otherwise turn off the viewer, and the viewer blocks ads, that's the buyer's fault.
As far as I'm concerned it's the advertisers responsibility not to tick me off. If because of that I end up having to pay for something that was otherwise "free", then I'll deal with it. Regardless, advertising that bugs me is not only not effective, but I will avoid those companies who commit such as offense.
It's not a matter of expense, and I know there's very little real creativity or artistry in Hollywood and Madison Avenue... but it doesn't take an artistic genius or a a million dollars to make an ad that isn't excessively noisy or flashing or stupid or otherwise likely to drive your audience to annoyance, anger or worse.
If the advertiser and content provider can't come up with a workable business plan, that's not _my_ problem.
Of course it's a good business model, for crooks..
Of course allofmp3 has a good business model, hide in a country that has looser copyright standards and look the other way when you sell to customers in the U.S..
Even if you don't care about legality, do you care about the artists not getting a cut? Granted, under the iron fist of the RIAA, they may get little or nothing anyway, but at least you're being legal about it.
On the other hand, eMusic has a great business model, although pricing per track regardless of length can lead to some odd situations (certain albums can be grotesquely over- or underpriced), but they are much cheaper than their DRM-shackled competitors, and if you aren't hogtied into the crap being excreted by the big labels and are willing to experiment and explore, they are an incredible value. I've been a subscriber for over a year and now get most of my music from them.
DRM will continue to become more and more onerous until a large proportion of the customer base rebels, which may never happen. In the meantime, you should patronize a company that isn't a crook and doesn't treat you like a crook.
Thanks to disinformation like this, the Corporatocracy is gaining mind-share in the American public. Any idea associated with a company is beginning to become sacrosanct to them and them alone. Copyright has become a perpetual monopoly and Fair Use is considered subversive and obsolete.
We are slowly beginning to think that the rights of corporations are much greater than they are thanks to the tireless efforts (extortion, lies, etc) of organizations like the RIAA, MPAA, and it's getting to the point where no one has even a common sense understanding of the law.
Combine that with a totally corrupt USPTO and we are handing our national government and power to the megacorps.
Commercial breaks are pretty predictable in length and I would always change the channel or mute the TV and go do something secure in the knowledge that I had about 2 minutes or so before I needed to even check back, but if commercial breaks are suddenly (gasp!) reasonably short, and the commercials themselves are geared more towards being entertaining and informative rather than annoying and repetitious, then by golly, people are much more likely to watch.
Raise your hand if this wasn't obvious to you...
Everyone's hand is up? I thought so.
p.s. It's even worse on radio where the commercial breaks are substantially longer.
The thing is, if MS tips their hand to early, it will be a fairly simple matter for the offending code to be removed from Linux, and then we'd have, say, a 2.8 Linux kernel against which MS has no patent claims. Of course, they can drag this fight out for years, and whether or not their patent claims are legitimate won't really matter. Besides, the fact that you can patent virtually anything imaginable will allow MS to patent (after the fact if necessary) some feature used by Linux, OSX or anything else, and simply bleed its victims dry regardless of the existence of prior art or anything else that would prevent their winning in a fair world.
I see this as the gauntless being thrown down. I see this as an admission that MS isn't going to even pretend they can or are going to compete. I see this as the true test of whether or not the United States, and the rest of the world, has become a corporatocracy, or whether the Rule of Law still has any power left.
No, the scary part is that Microsoft has enough money to drag down every Linux enterprise for years, or start paying them all off like they did Novell. The good news is that they'd be taking on the likes of Oracle and IBM.
How ironic that Big Blue could end up being the "underdog" against Microsoft in this deal. At least you can compliment Steve "MonkeyBoy" Ballmer for no longer pretending that Microsoft is going to continue trying to compete on quality or technology. At least he's now willing enough to be just transparent enough to let people know (or at least fear) that he will start trying to use the legal system do accomplish what years of massive, bloated, (and often failed) projects and billions in marketing spending could not.
I'm afraid this is an opening salvo of a war that will go on for the next decade or more. Microsoft has realized that they can't compete with, and never will be able to compete with, OSS, and after a years long campaign of FUD, it is time to heat up the Cold War. Microsoft has realized that they are no longer the "IBM" of software and that a critical mass is being reached in the consciousness of the public that Microsoft is not the be-all and end-all of software, which can (and in fact is) much more flexible and cheaper than Microsoft would have us believe. The public consciousness is starting to be affected by the idea that software development can be a tool to benefit everyone, rather than a necessary evil of modern life that only enriches a group of single-minded, arrogant and perhaps corrupt executives. Microsoft is afraid that people are beginning to realize that their computers can work for them rather than the other way around, which is what it always was in the past.
Firefox has gained a lot of public mindshare, and the public is starting to learn that OSS can do things Microsoft with all its billions and its army of software engineers led by ineffectual middle-management suckups can't. Microsoft would like us to forget the good old days, where one really smart guy, or a small number of really smart guys, can change the world.
Microsoft wants you to live in the software equivalent of North Korea, where everyone is imprisoned (i.e., locked into their software) and starving (for quality, functionality and security) but Microsoft rules supreme, and you can either pay their price, march to their tune or simply do without, locked in a gulag of alternative technology with which MS refuses to interoperate.
But lucky for us, the users and independent software developers and companies devoted to contributing to OSS have power that the poor, oppressed North Koreans can only dream about. We do have a choice, and it's possible to break free of the Microsoft chains when you want to. I'm not opposed to using MS software, some of which is good, particularly Windows 2000, but in other cases (like Word) it is a nightmare of bugs and poor usability that decimates productivity for the sole reason of "everyone else uses it". In the case of Word, I recently learned that Restructured Text allows me to create documentation about three times faster than with Word, is far more flexible, and doesn't require hours upon hours to achieve consistently good-looking output on Web pages, PDF's or any other format. I have become an evangelist for its use at the place I work, but have been warned against disrupting the political correctness of the cult of Microsoft.
Unfortunately, Microsoft also has power, much in the same way as Kim Jong Il: an army of lawyers, prisons of DRM, EULA's that absolve them of any defect, no matter how severe, a nuclear arsenal of billions of dollars and the corruption of a U.S.-government-sanctioned monopoly status (i.e. convicted but never really punished).
It's going to be a long war against a ruthless enemy (gee I sound like a representative of President Bush). Of course, unlike the "war on Terrorism" this enemy isn't always evil, but it is committed to domination over us nonetheless, and if there's any chance of striking a blow against the corporatocracy that America, and the rest of the world, is coming to, this could be no less than the "shot heard 'round the world."
Let's make sure what gets heard is the shot of independence, creativity and true innovation. Let's make sure the shot that gets heard is that computers and software, rather than the users, are the tools. Let's make sure that the shot gets heard that big ideas, hard work, creativity, and true freedom can still win over lawyers, guns and money.
It was sad to see Miller kicked out, when he finally had something really good to show for his efforts, but for all the good talk, I always felt AOL still wants to be Old Media, and to me, this new appointment seems to confirm that perception.
Regardless of how you view the Bible, one thing you cannot deny is that these kinds of practices were not unknown thousands of years ago.
I find it amusing that so many people use this as an oppotunity to bash the Bible and its believers, which is not relevant to the conversation. What is relevant is that stories of these kinds were being written thousands of years ago, and that this kind of behavior is not new.
The holders of trademarks are just envious of how you can patent anything and strongarm anyone into doing what you want... they just want their fair share of being able to abuse the law for fun and profit.
Maybe they should patent the look of their trains and pursue that route. Why not? You can patent anything that even resembles an idea.
On the post: Well, Maybe If They Hadn't Bought All Those Boots...
Yawn...
Accountability is so 20th century...
On the post: Congressional Aide Hires Fake Hackers To Improve Apparently Well-Deserved Low GPA
Don't worry...
On the post: Well, That's One Way To Try And Boost Zune Sales
Re: kah
On the post: If Bill Gates Thinks DRM Is So Flawed, Why Doesn't He Do Something About It?
Re: first
I think MS has gotten to the point where they have been pretending so long that they actually believe what's best for them is best for the customer.
On the post: Wow, That Attorney General Must Really Care About The Kids!
Re: Registering email addresses! What a laugh!
So are you saying you're an offender?
On the post: Microsoft Repeats The Broken Windows Fallacy
Re:
Everyone around here seems to forget that there are a lot of companies that provide enterprise support for Linux, including RedHat (it's their primary source of revenue), IBM, and a whole bunch of others I don't even know about.
Switching to Linux does not mean you are faced with only "informal" tech support on the Web (which is usually pretty darn good from my experience), it simply means you pay for a support contract with one of the companies that provide it, and you still are much better off financially.
As has been stated many times, Linux isn't going to replace the Windows desktop for the average user... yet. But it could for a reasonably motivated user, and I would seriously look at it for the server room (The idea of running Exchange scares the crap out of me... on the other hand, I've had good experience with SQL Server).
But if you guys would rather sit around and call each other rude names like a bunch of eighth-graders, by all means, don't let me stop you.
p.s. I just switched to Ubuntu on my primary home machine. My 13th Level Fighter will totally kick your butt, so I am the supreme Linux h4x0r!
On the post: Just Because You Have MS, It Doesn't Mean You Can Surf Porn At Work
I'm sure it's not intentionally misleading...
On the plus side, for once a ridiculous lawsuit actually failed.
On the post: People Don't Hate Advertising; They Hate Bad, Intrusive And Annoying Advertising
Re: Blocking bad ads is fine, but ad blockers don'
If ads don't work and pay-per-view doesn't work, find another job.
On the post: People Don't Hate Advertising; They Hate Bad, Intrusive And Annoying Advertising
Re: What are the Alternatives?
If the ad buyer is so clueless as to make advertisements that offend, annoy otherwise turn off the viewer, and the viewer blocks ads, that's the buyer's fault.
As far as I'm concerned it's the advertisers responsibility not to tick me off. If because of that I end up having to pay for something that was otherwise "free", then I'll deal with it. Regardless, advertising that bugs me is not only not effective, but I will avoid those companies who commit such as offense.
It's not a matter of expense, and I know there's very little real creativity or artistry in Hollywood and Madison Avenue... but it doesn't take an artistic genius or a a million dollars to make an ad that isn't excessively noisy or flashing or stupid or otherwise likely to drive your audience to annoyance, anger or worse.
If the advertiser and content provider can't come up with a workable business plan, that's not _my_ problem.
On the post: It Takes More Than A Single MP3 To Embrace The DRM-Free World
Of course it's a good business model, for crooks..
Even if you don't care about legality, do you care about the artists not getting a cut? Granted, under the iron fist of the RIAA, they may get little or nothing anyway, but at least you're being legal about it.
On the other hand, eMusic has a great business model, although pricing per track regardless of length can lead to some odd situations (certain albums can be grotesquely over- or underpriced), but they are much cheaper than their DRM-shackled competitors, and if you aren't hogtied into the crap being excreted by the big labels and are willing to experiment and explore, they are an incredible value. I've been a subscriber for over a year and now get most of my music from them.
DRM will continue to become more and more onerous until a large proportion of the customer base rebels, which may never happen. In the meantime, you should patronize a company that isn't a crook and doesn't treat you like a crook.
On the post: Will The Recording Industry Sue Edgar Bronfman For Downloading?
Re:
But if he were a single mother, they'd have lawyers on him (her) so fast you'd get a nosebleed.
On the post: Would You Hand Over Your Driver's License Just To Get Some Pancakes?
Re: Re: Spelling and Grammar
Of course, when you're talking pancakes, well, let's just say I don't want to admit what I'd do for pancakes.
By the way, nice to meet you. Who's the other one?
On the post: Thomas Jefferson's Estate Curators A Bit Behind On Thomas Jefferson's Views On Intellectual Property
The rise of corporatocracy...
We are slowly beginning to think that the rights of corporations are much greater than they are thanks to the tireless efforts (extortion, lies, etc) of organizations like the RIAA, MPAA, and it's getting to the point where no one has even a common sense understanding of the law.
Combine that with a totally corrupt USPTO and we are handing our national government and power to the megacorps.
Congratulations, America.
On the post: Paying More For Much Less: The New TV Commercial Strategy
Blinding Flash of the obvious...
Raise your hand if this wasn't obvious to you...
Everyone's hand is up? I thought so.
p.s. It's even worse on radio where the commercial breaks are substantially longer.
On the post: Now That's More Like The Microsoft We Know
Re: If they beleive M$ code is in Linux...
I see this as the gauntless being thrown down. I see this as an admission that MS isn't going to even pretend they can or are going to compete. I see this as the true test of whether or not the United States, and the rest of the world, has become a corporatocracy, or whether the Rule of Law still has any power left.
On the post: Now That's More Like The Microsoft We Know
Re: DUH!
How ironic that Big Blue could end up being the "underdog" against Microsoft in this deal. At least you can compliment Steve "MonkeyBoy" Ballmer for no longer pretending that Microsoft is going to continue trying to compete on quality or technology. At least he's now willing enough to be just transparent enough to let people know (or at least fear) that he will start trying to use the legal system do accomplish what years of massive, bloated, (and often failed) projects and billions in marketing spending could not.
I'm afraid this is an opening salvo of a war that will go on for the next decade or more. Microsoft has realized that they can't compete with, and never will be able to compete with, OSS, and after a years long campaign of FUD, it is time to heat up the Cold War. Microsoft has realized that they are no longer the "IBM" of software and that a critical mass is being reached in the consciousness of the public that Microsoft is not the be-all and end-all of software, which can (and in fact is) much more flexible and cheaper than Microsoft would have us believe. The public consciousness is starting to be affected by the idea that software development can be a tool to benefit everyone, rather than a necessary evil of modern life that only enriches a group of single-minded, arrogant and perhaps corrupt executives. Microsoft is afraid that people are beginning to realize that their computers can work for them rather than the other way around, which is what it always was in the past.
Firefox has gained a lot of public mindshare, and the public is starting to learn that OSS can do things Microsoft with all its billions and its army of software engineers led by ineffectual middle-management suckups can't. Microsoft would like us to forget the good old days, where one really smart guy, or a small number of really smart guys, can change the world.
Microsoft wants you to live in the software equivalent of North Korea, where everyone is imprisoned (i.e., locked into their software) and starving (for quality, functionality and security) but Microsoft rules supreme, and you can either pay their price, march to their tune or simply do without, locked in a gulag of alternative technology with which MS refuses to interoperate.
But lucky for us, the users and independent software developers and companies devoted to contributing to OSS have power that the poor, oppressed North Koreans can only dream about. We do have a choice, and it's possible to break free of the Microsoft chains when you want to. I'm not opposed to using MS software, some of which is good, particularly Windows 2000, but in other cases (like Word) it is a nightmare of bugs and poor usability that decimates productivity for the sole reason of "everyone else uses it". In the case of Word, I recently learned that Restructured Text allows me to create documentation about three times faster than with Word, is far more flexible, and doesn't require hours upon hours to achieve consistently good-looking output on Web pages, PDF's or any other format. I have become an evangelist for its use at the place I work, but have been warned against disrupting the political correctness of the cult of Microsoft.
Unfortunately, Microsoft also has power, much in the same way as Kim Jong Il: an army of lawyers, prisons of DRM, EULA's that absolve them of any defect, no matter how severe, a nuclear arsenal of billions of dollars and the corruption of a U.S.-government-sanctioned monopoly status (i.e. convicted but never really punished).
It's going to be a long war against a ruthless enemy (gee I sound like a representative of President Bush). Of course, unlike the "war on Terrorism" this enemy isn't always evil, but it is committed to domination over us nonetheless, and if there's any chance of striking a blow against the corporatocracy that America, and the rest of the world, is coming to, this could be no less than the "shot heard 'round the world."
Let's make sure what gets heard is the shot of independence, creativity and true innovation. Let's make sure the shot that gets heard is that computers and software, rather than the users, are the tools. Let's make sure that the shot gets heard that big ideas, hard work, creativity, and true freedom can still win over lawyers, guns and money.
On the post: New Media Execs Out, Old Media Execs In
Time-Warner is Old Media
Still, you need to wait and see what happens.
On the post: Forget Fake Rolexes, Are There Really 3,000 Fake Chinese Companies In Silicon Valley?
Re: Re: FACTS
I find it amusing that so many people use this as an oppotunity to bash the Bible and its believers, which is not relevant to the conversation. What is relevant is that stories of these kinds were being written thousands of years ago, and that this kind of behavior is not new.
On the post: Did Shaquille O'Neal Raid The Wrong Home For Child Porn Over Mistaken IP Address?
Re: Shaq is a Deputy Sheriff
Just kidding...
Keep up the good work and bust those bad guys.
On the post: Burlington Northern And Santa Fe Railway Says Artists Cannot Depict Their Trains
Patent-envy...
Maybe they should patent the look of their trains and pursue that route. Why not? You can patent anything that even resembles an idea.
Next >>