Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).


Comment: Re:Why excempt anyone? (Score 1) 212

by JWW (#49469079) Attached to: Legislation Would Force Radio Stations To Pay Royalties

Well, talk is excluded because they don't play music outside of the bumper music going into and out of commercial.

You could argue that they should pay based on that, but then a talk station with less than $1 in revenue would be paying the same as a 24/7 music station, and that hardly seems fair. Plus if that happened, it could spell the end of bumper music and the talk stations would claim that they play no music, why are they being charged.

The religious exemption, I have no clue. Religious music publishing and radio works the same as regular music.

Comment: Re:Honestly (Score 2) 587

by JWW (#49415327) Attached to: Hugo Awards Turn (Even More) Political

The story is here: http://www.apex-magazine.com/i...

A word of warning. You will not get the minutes of your life wasted on reading this back.

To call it sophomoric drivel is an insult to sophomores.

It may have good and correct political intentions, but it is overtly cloying, snooty, and pretentious.

It is not good writing by any measure. That it is "award winning" is a travesty.

Comment: Re: freedom (Score 2) 1089

by JWW (#49300033) Attached to: Obama: Maybe It's Time For Mandatory Voting In US

Do you realize just how many potential mandatory voters don't file taxes every year? Or move beteween voting locales between elections? It's much larger numbers than you think. Mandatory voting would require the authorities to find them and, and this is the truly larger point CHARGE THEM WITH A CRIME.

Voting is a right. Mandatory voting is a compulsion. It changes the power of the vote from being something of the citizen over the government to a power the government wields over a citizen.

You can believe that power would be wielded honorably, but you'd quickly be proven wrong.

Comment: Re: freedom (Score 1) 1089

by JWW (#49298039) Attached to: Obama: Maybe It's Time For Mandatory Voting In US

Bzzzt. Wrong. Voted in every national level election since 1988.

But of course you got it wrong because you have it backwards. Those the vote would be known, those that don't vote would need to be looked into, investigated, or dare I say, spied upon.

My post was relatively in jest, but partly serious.

The government can't know who didn't vote without keeping meticulous records, hmmmmm lets call them "metadata", about peoples voting habits and whereabouts on voting day.

And don't say that they'd just look at the voter rolls and compare them to census data, they'd need to be far more thorough than that in their tracking and monitoring to be able to effectively fine or charge someone with the crime of not voting (and it'd have to be a crime to not vote because "mandatory").

Comment: Re: Today the EPA calls CO2 a pollutant (Score 1) 517

by JWW (#49187769) Attached to: White House Threatens Veto Over EPA "Secret Science" Bills

You used the standard dictionary definition of waterway. But the EPA has expanded their, correct in my opinion, oversight of actual waterways to include standing water and even temporary bodies of water from storms. A willful expansion of their power. I think they are giving themselves a club to use against farmers who do other things they don't like but can't stop through their current regulations. So they bogusly expand the regulations they have.

Comment: Re:Parody (Score 4, Insightful) 255

by JWW (#49174509) Attached to: Gritty 'Power Rangers' Short Is Not Fair Use

So what?

It was an interesting bit of film.

One that does NOT ONE DAMN THING to detract from the "actual" Power Rangers.

If our fucked up copyright laws forbid something as simple as this then that whole "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts" shit that was intended is totally gone to hell.

If we can't stand on the shoulders of giants (or dudes in tacky suits) and create "new" interpretations, then we've lost the real reason for copyright anyway. I'm not saying that Power Rangers doesn't deserve copyright, but I am saying that reasonable copyright terms should have put it in the public domain by now.

I am currently boycotting all songs from Tom Petty because of his crappy copyright challenge to Sam Smith's "borrowing his song" I mean come on, if we compare every song with every other song and "alter the tempo", and "vary the pitch" then we're screwed. Music reuses all kinds of things all the time. Fuck, soon people will try to copyrighting fucking chords progressions and beats. Yeah Sam Smith's song resembles one of Petty's, but only if you torture it enough. What's next, syllable counts on choruses? That shit was ridiculous.

Copyright has become a farce that no longer does any good for the public. And since thats what it was supposed to be for, I'd say its high time we scrap the whole decrepit edifice of modern copyright law and start over.

Put your best foot forward. Or just call in and say you're sick.