Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:For only a small fee I can watch my own movie? (Score 1) 371

Yep, I can agree with all that. I mostly tend to focus on pirates, not because they're more evil and greedy than the **AA, but because I think they need a kick in the pants, and realise they are far from blameless in this situation. In fact, I'm generally happy if someone acknowledges that what they're doing hurts the artists, even if they don't stop. Having that realisation leads to genuine moderation, which I think is a fair compromise.

I'm also less keen than some of the others to dismantle the publishers. I think they still provide a valuable service, even if it won't necessarily last long. I'm far more disturbed by the mere fact that companies, or any rich party in fact, can exert this amount of control over the government. Regardless of who is abusing this hole in the political system, it should be plugged as soon as possible. Beheading one company is not a long term solution to this.

Comment Re:The RIAA/MPAA shou take notice! (Score 1) 196

Not quite. Can you buy a single track, from any album no matter how old or obscure, for a dollar at a store? No; iTunes allows you to buy single tracks for microtransaction amounts.

However, if you want the music itself to be free, why not throw in youtube into the mix? Plenty of record labels upload to youtube these days. Combine youtube + itunes, you have the free + microtransactions model that the OP wanted.

Comment Re:The RIAA/MPAA shou take notice! (Score 1) 196

Don't try to fool people.

I won't.

iTunes is just a segment of the industry, not the industry as a whole.

Obviously.

The industry management (RIAA and MPAA) do not want this model, and fight against it.

Well, that explains why they flatly refused to sell their music on it. That did happen, right?

Hence we had SOPA and PIPA being lobbied for

Oh yes, for the famous anti-iTunes section! Wait, which section was that again?

and lets not forget the constant stream of lawsuits, invalid DCMA take down orders, domain seizures, and other miscellaneous police actions.

No, of course not. Tell me, are you sure you're replying to the right post?

Comment Re:OP - here's WHY you were "down-modded" (Score 1) 169

I state that, because a good 90% of the fools around here don't know a DAMNED THING about computing other than @ user level

That's probably because it's news for nerds, not news for computer engineers. The days when there was a natural bias on the internet towards computer geeks is over. Nerds on the internet come in all flavours now.

Comment Re:For only a small fee I can watch my own movie? (Score 1) 371

Since how ripping your OWN movie is pirating anything ?

It's not.

You want to stop piracy ? Give people what they pay for in an easy and compelling way and for an honest price.

Here's the problem: when completely free is an alternative, no price significantly above zero will seem honest for long. Look how quickly the "It's just a copy. It doesn't cost anything." bullshit spread around slashdot. Look at the piracy rates of mobile apps. It's so very, very easy to rationalise your way out of feeling guilty for weaselling out of the smallest fees.

Comment Re:For only a small fee I can watch my own movie? (Score 1) 371

I'm not saying that pirates are like Darth Vader in every way, I'm saying for the purposes of this analogy, the black leather glove fits much better on the pirates than the publishers. Some of the things I've heard pirates say right here on /. almost transliterates to "I have altered the deal. Pray I do not alter it further.". Now, I can tell by your proudly one-eyed, cherry-picked assessment of the **AA that you're not their biggest fan, but the fact is they have no real power over the pirates.

They made their deal with the pirates (foolishly, as some may say) that they would invest hugely in entertainment for them in exchange for honouring certain exclusive distribution rights, and the pirates decided instead to simply alter the deal, threatening that they would alter it further if they fought back at all. The analogy is so completely self-evident, I don't know why more people haven't picked up on it. Of course, when the publishers fought back, pirate revisionists jumped on the opportunity to retroactively blame all their behaviour on the evil companies, but neither I nor congress have forgotten the true order of events.

However, as you pointed out, when you extend the scope somewhat, the publishers can also lay claim to the role of Darth Vader. The problem is that both sides are a bit evil, a bit power-crazed, and a bit socially irresponsible, so Vader's leather glove changes hands from time to time, given the analogy. Fuck both sides of this issue. Currently, fuck pirates that little bit extra. At least the studios try, from time to time, to compromise, and deliver more along the lines of what pirates want. The only pirate I'd ever met who actually compromised the other way in the last decade was me.

Comment Re:For only a small fee I can watch my own movie? (Score 2) 371

Do you know why that Darth Vader meme doesn't work exactly? It's because you've got the roles reversed. It's the pirates who are Darth Vader, not the MPAA. Think about it: the pirates have almost all the power, and it's gone straight to their heads. They are in the position to make veiled threats about altering deals, the deal in this case being copyright law in general. Well, not the law as in what's written on paper, rather what they choose to obey and when. If the publishers fight back, the pirates just alter the deal further, by refusing to buy their stuff on some kind "moral" ground (and download it anyway on the side). In fact, the pirates have altered the deal quite significantly. Apparently now game developers have to include dedicated server support in order for the pirates to consider not ripping them off.

So pirates, ask yourself this: Exactly how much can we condemn the publishers for lashing out as we force-choke them?

Comment Re:I use my iPad on the train (Score 1) 805

And I'm not generally optimistic about human nature. But cell phone usage, I just don't see how this can go on very much longer as it is -- I mean, it's raw uncut assholishness, all the time, and everyone KNOWS it, but for now, they all DO IT anyway.

Well, not quite everyone. I, for one, have never felt that it's raw uncut assholishness. I've never experienced a conversation on a mobile phone that I've actually found obtrusive (although I'm sure they could be made so if someone put in a concerted effort). I guess I've never thought that we are entitled to peace and quiet in public places, certainly not at the expense of our entitlement to communication, so I've never felt that it was rude.

Comment Re:hrm (Score 2) 378

There a huge difference. You can indeed steal Internet service - you are not making a copy - you are actually taking something someone else paid for, i.e. theft.

Do you know how much the artist paid for the copies you take? They have donated both their time and their money into creating it. It's not like they come to them for free, it's just that most of the cost is incurred very early in the creation process.

Comment Re:Since when is JavaScript an unorthodox choice? (Score 4, Insightful) 355

If you don't know enough about computers to install Python, you probably don't know enough about computers to learn how to code.

Coding is not a computer skill, it's a logical skill. It's about translating abstract intentions into a well-defined precise logical language. The skill is knowing how to efficiently turn your ideas into instructions that a machine can carry out. That's why it's so transferable between platforms and languages, because it's really a skill that's independent of a computer. It would be more than possible, for example, to teach someone who's never seen a computer to write pseudocode.

Comment Re:People still use PayPal? (Score 2) 301

Of course, if you care more about convenience than you do about their censorship and not standing up for what's right if it might cost them a buck, go ahead.

Thank you, I certainly will.

If I want erotic fiction with incestuous fantasies, I will simply turn to a store with payment methods other than Paypal. In fact, in light of these events, I would expect stores who do stock such fiction to offer other payment methods anyway. How Paypal is run is Paypal's business, and whether I use it is between me and the sellers. The only negative repercussions that their censorship has, to anyone other than potentially themselves, is a slight inconvenience when changing to a different system of payment. Forgive me if I can't muster the necessary outrage over that.

Slashdot Top Deals

"You know, we've won awards for this crap." -- David Letterman

Working...