I note that it's quicker to download a FLAC version of a CD I've just bought than format-shift it manually.
Really? Do you have any tips to make the best of the experience?
Good point. In the interests of historical accuracy, all shows should include aggressive chain-smoking. To do otherwise would portray a diminished control over the health of the general population.
I'm going to go off on a tin-foil-hat tangent and say that the whole thing is about control of the internet and the mind- and freedom-enhancing benefits enabled by such interpersonal communication.
Ie. Not about piracy.
I wouldn't say it's pointless to try; they play their part in the arms race and help breed a better opponent.
and all of this is ignoring the fact I can't justify $10-$20 for 90 minutes of content I'm going to watch all of once, get fucked.
What are you, some kind of kill-joy? How are the studios to fund location shoots in every major capital city and thus funnel cash into these cities' coffers if you don't foot the bill? What's wrong with you?
More importantly IMO, I feel that the idea that Assange might have raped someone did more to remove/prevent support amongst ordinary people than did the idea that he "assisted 'espionage'". Part of a multi-pronged ad-hominem.
Perhaps the question of how best to smear the next Assange should be thrown open as an 'Ask Slashdot ?'
How is this flamebait? Referring to widely acknowledged lies used to obtain something otherwise unavailable isn't breaking the rules.
Non-police don't have the training and experience required to allow them to perform the duties of a real police officer - there's substantial risk of donut overdose.
So you should get paid overtime for that. Why would you work for free? Don't you want to live?
I think the idea is that one must prostrate oneself before the employer or anyone who might communicate with him to show that their will is sacrosanct and that one will gladly do anything for pay (even accept no pay.)
"I'm not in it for the momey, I do it for the challenge / fun / exposure to new technologies / blah" is an effective large glowing finger hovering in the air, pointing at the perpetrator. Seriously, does anyone think that the employer believes this BS? All it does is serve to hilight that the potential employee is desperate and therefore will take absolutely anything thrown at them as a result of the employer being unable to successfully distinguish between his every personal desire and job-related requirements.
For me, I'm in it for the money - if I want a challenge, I have many ways to generate them for myself; if I want access to the latest technologies, I can download them and setup an environment myself. MONEY! - one of the best modern ways to buy food.
Preemptive update: I suspect such honesty wouldn't work out though; employers really do seem to want zealots who will live revel in their mundane business domain and believe that such people really do exist. N'est-ce pas?
I know the lawyers have a legal term for this kind of bad faith
"Business As Usual."
What do you suppose they think would be "enough" to punish copyright violaters? (Maybe they could start by using proper terminology?)
I'm going to go with "force them to listen to the 'music' produced by this generation's music industry."
That should be punishment enough for most crimes (even imaginary ones.)
It's a great source of business.
You can't just say "you're doing it wrong" without providing a better alternative.
Who else are they gonna rob? There are lots of US citizens.
It's just an alternate way to ask if he wants a donut with his coffee.