I was being silly. :p

and they'd have to be willing to have points put on their license and have their insurance rates raised.

So, being lazy is the hinderance.

"Newsflash, people being lazy bastards prevents them from enacting change despite it possibly being better for them."

Great story!

Even better don't buy the CD, download the free music from that millions of great artist out there that have chosen not to bother with trying to make money from recorded music, and instead spend your money on going to shows, an experience that cannot be duplicated in a recording.

Really? Your going to spit hairs on taking an AAC file to AIFF then back to MP3? If you are such an audiophile that this process is going to be degrading your listening experience, you probably shouldn't be purchasing from iTunes to begin with. lol

Seriously, the difference is so negligible to the casual ear it's ridiculous for you to even bring this up.

Really? Harder then what? Not using the computer at all? lol

how so? Is that just your personal observation or do you have some data to back your statement up?

"Whitmore says the investment Apple's customers have made in content for those devices in terms of apps, videos, and music purchased at the iTunes Store creates Apple's 'stickiness.' "

Music - burn to audio disk
Videos - http://www.aimersoft.com/tutorial/burn-itunes-movie-to-dvd.html
Apps - Your SoL, but isn't that the case for any user switching between operating systems/platforms?

So it's hard to make a playlist, put a blank disk in the drive, hit "burn to disk", and select "Audio Disk"?

It's so easy even a Fucking Apple Fanboi could do it. Hell I could also do it with iTunes for Windows does that make me a Fucking Microsoft Fanboi as well?

Burn your DRM ladden iTunes Music Store purchaces to disk then rip that disk to mp3 (or whatever format of your choice). OMG DRM free music from the iTunes Music Store that you can "jump ship" with! I know... it's almost rocket surgery, but come on! lol

...and it is not ours. Are you going to be prepared for when it comes?

I think the problem we are all having in this debate, including myself, is our perception of devices like the iPhone and iPad as general computing devices. Most of us want to believe that the iPhone/iPad are much like our desktop/laptop computers and that we should be able to enjoy using them as such. Apple, and no doubt, many other companies, want us to view these devices (including Sony's PS3, which is having similar trouble removing it's ability to utilize 3rd party OS) more like we would view a Walkman, TV, or perhaps even the blender in your kitchen. Apple, Sony, et el, want full control over these devices so that they can maximize their potential to profit from them. As was mentioned last week in an article, general computing devices are getting less and less profitable as their prices decrease due to cheaper production process and increased demand.

Unfortunately for most of our tech heads, the general public doesn't care if these devices are general computing devices that let us hack them to do any job we want them to, they just want to listen to music, watch movies, read a book, or play a video game. In other words, so long as the Walkman is adequately playing the tape cassettes in their collection, the general public are going to be satisfied with their purchase.

I dropped the Cable/Internet package from Comcast for $120 / month (basic cable w/ internet) for $40 / month DSL.

I would just like to add that the issue I was previously trying to state was that as a juror it is your RIGHT and DUTY to vote your conscience should the law be "wrong" in the particular case you are participating in. The case mentioned in this topic is precisely just such a case and it was unfortunate that the jurors were not aware that it was their RIGHT and DUTY to vote their conscience. It seems that they were not informed of this fact and that this is a major point of contention in the Jury Nullification debate whereby a defense team is not permitted to notify the jury of such.

In my opinion, justice was not served in this case and it is a travesty that such a thing should happen in our supposedly free state.

Jury Nullification does not mean what you think it means. You seem to be implying that Jury Nullification is a process by which a jury's verdict is "nullified" in some manner, which just isn't the case. I'm not sure what else I can say. Please go to the wikipedia page that I linked to previously. It clearly defines the Jury Nullification process. Specifically... "Jury nullification occurs when a jury in a criminal case acquits a defendant despite the weight of evidence against him or her."

There is no questioning whether or not this process exists within the US court system, only a debate as to whether or not it is a desirable. I'm not sure what else I can say.