I would have preferred they had waited a few more months and had plasma be *somewhat* ready for day to day use before they crept out of beta stage. There was tons of interest in KDE4 even at beta stages, and there was nothing stopping developers from getting a head start at that point. Six more months of baking in the oven in order to avoid tarnishing KDE's good name would have been well worth it in my opinion.

It was a mistake to rush it so, and frankly the premature release wasn't even as discouraging as the fact that lead developers like A. Seigo are still too stubborn to admit it was poor judgment. That doesn't bode well for design and release planning for the future of the project.

Most notably in the 4.0 release announcement. It didn't state it was perfect, but it sure didn't give the impression that it wasn't ready for normal users. see: http://www.kde.org/announcements/4.0

In addition, the KDE team had been pimping the 4.0 release for months prior to the actual release date. When the betas were released in a horrifically unfinished state, users were told to keep calm because they were just betas, not the final release. When the final release was released, users were told to keep calm because it was never meant to actually be used by users. When 4.1 was released, users were told to keep calm.... and so on.

I think what actually happened is that the KDE team was very rushed at the end as they neared the release date, and decided to just dump out what they had rather than delay. After all, the google kde4 release party had already been planned and scheduled.

No, he isn't. After taking a step back and looking at the whole debacle of 4.0, it's simply stubborn to claim that it wasn't a total disaster, or at the very least misguided.

I thought Aaron Seigo was still insisting that there was no mistake with the release of 4.0, but that everything went perfectly according to plan?

When should these actually be considered stable by the average person... 5.6, 5.7? Also, are these 5.x releases also going to be termed SCs or Software Compendiums or whatever they are called, or has the wondrous KDE marketing team thought of a new catchy term? My suggestion: Kickass Release of Awesome Power, or KRAP. "Dude, I just dumped KDE KRAP 5.2 on my system! It doesn't have a functioning taskbar yet, but the rotating twitter desktop widget is sweet!"

It's interesting how so many boogedy-boogedy scare tactics have been used about child pornography over the years that even the mere mention of the term causes most people to use a qualifier like "which is absolutely despicable". Do you do the same when you mention murder (which is absolutely despicable) in a sentence? Or even actual child rape (which is absolutely despicable)?

Probably not.

You sound Australian.

Your internet sucks. Stop trying to drag the rest of the world down with you.

It's probably due to the over-saturated coverage on slashdot, but I feel like FF4 has almost been released for the past year now.

Hilarious. Anyway, the point the OP and then myself made are that ebook prices, even in this profit-driven world, are a ripoff. That's it.

I'm sure if they came out with a new vhs version of the original True Grit that was three times as expensive as the blueray, you'd defend that as a "temporal imbalance" due to marketing as well. God forbid anyone criticize a ridiculous price structure.

So they are essentially just driving up ebook prices to try and make a money grab. Otherwise the movie tie-in paperback would be just as expensive. Seems like a pretty clear rip-off.

It doesn't have to be new AND a best seller. Just one or the other is enough apparently.

Behold a $12.99 ebook of a novel written in 1968: http://search.barnesandnoble.com/True-Grit/Charles-Portis/e/9781590206508/?itm=4&USRI=true+grit

Note the paperback is $7.93. No one has to pay for Charles Portis' book signings or speaking engangements. I fail to see why ebook prices should be above paper book prices any time they might be popular. Should that be the selling point of ebook readers? That you can buy older books which aren't popular for slightly cheaper than their paper versions?

Check out a current bestseller, "Fall of Giants" by Ken Follet. It's more expensive as an ebook than in hardcover!

As I understand it, soon after the ipad was introduced, most book publishers renegotiated their contract with amazon and B&N. The retail chains had acted previously like a normal brick and mortar store and could set their own prices for ebooks, but after the renegotiation they switched to the "agency model" which lets the publisher set the price. Amazon and B&N have no control over ebook prices now, they only receive a certain percentage of the profits.

As a result, prices skyrocketed nearly overnight. The last 4 or 5 books I have been interested in buying have been more expensive as ebooks than in hardover or paperback form. So yes, it is a complete ripoff. Especially since you don't really own the ebooks you purchase and cannot lend them easily or sell them.

The context here being a set of replies to a poster wondering why the evidence of child abuse is often treated as if it were the very crime itself and conflated as such. You seem to do the same, weaving in and out of discussing organized child abuse networks and child sex tourism, when the OP was commenting about simple possession.

See above.

Again, I believe what the OP was bemoaning was the very short logical leap that seems to occur from possessing pictorial evidence of child abuse to actual in-person child abuse. Then when I bring up doubts about the amount of money involved in online child pornography, you post a link to a study involving sex tourism.

You're correct that I'm seeing things from an american perspective. Perhaps most europeans have a much more nuanced view of the matter. It has devolved to the point here that the vast majority of people being charged with federal crimes involving child pornography have obtained the material from peer to peer networks or otherwise off the internet without any financial transaction involved. Many are college students or relatively young. They are sent to prison for many years for possessing pictures, and then placed on the sex registry for a very long time after that, and treated as a pariah in society. The public at large makes little to no distinction between possessing photographs of child abuse and actually abusing a child. In fact, the penalties are often much harsher for the former. Thousands of people every year are turned into societal monsters for possessing pictures or video, while the real monsters, the ones actually abusing children, are unaffected by these arrests and convictions. And it's no coincidence that it is far easier for police and law enforcement authorities to arrest child porn possessors by the thousands than to investigate allegations of real child sexual abuse.

In that respect, you are correct that I may be misinterpreting the european perspective. I apologize if I am. I hope the subject is treated more rationally across the ocean, but given the original topic of this article, I doubt it.

That's fine, have a pleasant evening.

But child pornography laws make no distinction between photos from some organized industry and photos of some 17 year old taken of themselves. Just as they make no distinction between those who are paying for the material and those who are not. Given your theory, that would be an important distinction, no?

Sounds like those people need to be arrested and punished.

Wait, you say there is a link between evidence of a crime and the crime itself?!? I'm shocked! We should make it highly illegal to possess evidence of any crime! There's a clear link!

Apparently not. Just based on that statement alone, I'd say you are an expert in the child pornography field.

Sure. Of course there's no way we could ever verify this, because it's all so highly illegal. I guess we'll just have to take the authorities' word for it.

Anonymity involved with payments on the internet? Do you have any idea how rare that is? The percentage of CP busts at this point that involve financial transactions are minuscule. Most of these jackasses are caught through p2p progams and email attachments.

Right... because there are massive windfall profits being made in the child pornography industry. I'm sure there are a number of government organizations that will even tell you so. Billions and zillions of dollars annually and so forth.

Yes, that has been a very effective strategy for the "war on drugs" in the US. It's been a rousing success.

Do people actually believe that the majority of child porn producers are abusing children not because they have a sexual interest, but because of the profit motive? Seriously?

Uh yeah, that's part of the problem. Enough with the silly names. Did you really not know what he meant?