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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:When I meet a copyright owner (Score 1) 66

Okay, I was with you for a little while (especially on sympathy for the little indie guys, even if you don't have to, throw a couple bucks in their hats if you like their stuff), until you made clear that they're downloading it from you, presumably the authorized distributor.

Especially this piece:

I've seen someone literally sit at their computer for several hours a day for several days in a row, downloading large numbers of files they couldn't possible be using normally, only stopping each time our rate limiter kicked in and blocked further downloads for a while.

So...they downloaded exactly as much as they're allowed to, and then once allowed again, started again? Didn't hack your system, didn't go off to torrent it instead? And they're doing...what wrong again? How do you know how they're using it and if such use is "normally"?

Why on Earth does your system let people do that, if you don't want them to do that? And if they're paying you for some kind of "all you can eat" service, you don't then get to tell them "Well...I meant all you can eat, unless you're REALLY hungry." If they're paying you for that service (presumably they are, I doubt you'd be terribly upset if you were giving the stuff away to start with), just be glad you're being paid. It's cash in the hat. And with how widespread pirate content is, they don't have to throw in a nickel. A similar mistake was made with DRM--you get more grief from the legal option than the illegal one! (Whoever made the statement to you about DRM is a moron, it's not effective anyway and would drive away your users.)

Now, by all means, if you want to go find out who's uploading your stuff somewhere, and go after them, I won't have a bit more sympathy for them than you will, especially if you explicitly told them not to and they turned around and told you to fuck off. But attack that end, not your users. When it comes down to it, you can't know why anyone downloaded such and such thing.

Comment Re:The fact that MDMA use... (Score 1) 144

So, it's news to you that drugs have side effects?

All drugs can be dangerous. All drugs are dangerous if taken to overdose. (Look up the effects of an acetaminophen overdose sometime, and you can buy that without so much as a prescription.) And also consider that it's currently illegal, meaning the stuff out there is of varying quality and cut and produced with god only knows what. A real pharmaceutical with strict manufacturing standards and quality control will, by definition, be at least more safe.

But it will still have side effects and be dangerous if you overdose on it. Like...you know...every medicine there is.

Comment Re: An idiot wrote this (Score 1) 275

who says that they will do anything BUT that ?
Economics dictates that you run those plants for 50 years or more.
And considering that China continues to build up more new coal plants than they are putting in new AE (wind and solar and hydro COMBINED), it is pretty certain that China will not shut these down.

Comment Re: Here come the science deniers (Score 1) 553

Actually, even for harmful drugs, most people who use them are doing us a favor. End of life, regardless of when it comes or how, is often expensive, but people who smoke, use drugs, etc., tend to die much younger. So, less (or no) Social Security collected, less Medicare use, the whole thing. They actually cost the public a great deal less than those who live healthy lives to their 90s.

Or in other words, that's a sanctimonious moralistic argument not at all based in facts. If you're really worried about public spending, thank a smoker next time you see one.

Comment Re:Will it stand? (Score 1) 154

The reason contracts have any meaning whatsoever is because the law stands behind them. If someone breaks a contract, you can count on being able to take them to court and get the situation remedied.

There are plenty of things you cannot put in a contract and expect a court to enforce. Some because they're unconscionable or illegal to start with (such as murder for hire), and some that lawmakers have explicitly passed laws against.

Since it's the law that backs a contract, I certainly don't see why the law can't say "If a contract says X, Y, or Z, we will not enforce that portion of it." That puts you on clear notice that such a provision is not enforceable by the normal means.

Submission + - It Will Soon Be Illegal To Punish Customers Who Criticize Businesses Online (arstechnica.com)

An anonymous reader writes: Congress has passed a law protecting the right of U.S. consumers to post negative online reviews without fear of retaliation from companies. The bipartisan Consumer Review Fairness Act was passed by unanimous consent in the US Senate yesterday, a Senate Commerce Committee announcement said. The bill, introduced in 2014, was already approved by the House of Representatives and now awaits President Obama's signature. The Consumer Review Fairness Act—full text available here—voids any provision in a form contract that prohibits or restricts customers from posting reviews about the goods, services, or conduct of the company providing the product or service. It also voids provisions that impose penalties or fees on customers for posting online reviews as well as those that require customers to give up the intellectual property rights related to such reviews. The legislation empowers the Federal Trade Commission to enforce the new law and impose penalties when necessary. The bill also protects reviews that aren't available via the Internet.

Comment Re:Um... so what? (Score 1) 106

Hilarious. Your original argument WAS THE DEFINITION OF FREE MARKET.

There's a reasonable argument that there's a right number of Taxis. Too few and people don't get a proper service. Too many and there's congestion. Too many empty taxis waiting round.

And then, this gem: A free market finds A level, not necessarily the right level.

WTF is the "right" level, then? You clearly have no fucking clue, and have not cited a SINGLE source or answered any questions outside your little brain to the contrary...

Comment Re:That's nice (Score 1) 142

My Dell 2006 laptop is still going strong (with a self-applied memory upgrade, disk upgrade, and battery swap).

My 2012 Macbook Pro has had several annoying graphics issues I have not been able to do anything about due to the total pain in the ass steps to required even to try to self-repair anything on it.

Not to mention that the new replacement MBP is a fucking disaster for any actual "Pros" who made the mistake of buying the previous generation (which was goddamn great HW, if unreliable as shit).

Comment Re:Silicon Valley able to cope with Trump regime? (Score 1) 184

visas are fine. Seriously. NO ISSUES with green cards.
The 2 big issues is the massive number of illegals living here (probably a lot closer to 30 million, not 12 million; last time, stats got it all wrong)
And then the huge misuse of H1Bs.

The solution is to add more visas for position based, as opposed to family based, while solving the illegals and remove the H1Bs.
In addition, for the position based green card, the pay needs to be at least AVERAGE for that position (no less), while the taxes are double of which the company will pay the second portion.

Slashdot Top Deals

No line available at 300 baud.

Working...