I don't know how it is now, but last I heard the voluntary rating restrictions were working a lot better than the mandated restrictions on alcohol and tobacco. The problem isn't with the retailers--it's with the parents. All of the rating restrictions you could think up will do squat if the parents just buy the games for their kids anyway (which is what they already do). I worked in video games retail for 5 years, and most parents could care less about the ratings--in fact they usually were pissed that they had to come buy the restricted games for their kids.
This is the frightening problem that we are having in the world now--apathy ("As long as it's something that I don't like, I don't care if the censor it"). That can, and will change real quick if we're not careful.
To alter a quote:
First they censored the terrorists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a terrorist.
Then they censored the criminals,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a criminal.
Then they censored the religious extremists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a religious extremist.
Then they censored the political extremists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a political extremist.
Then they censored the pirates,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a pirate.
Then they censored me,
and there was no one left to speak for me.
Ah...the age old open source vs. closed source argument.
Switching to open source will only be cheaper in the initial purchase. The cost will quickly ramp up from there. Everyone seems to forget that the cost of the hardware/software is just a part of the full cost. You also have to factor in training and support. I, for one would not want to be the one in charge of having to train and support all 26,000 end users of those new laptops running open source software. That'll get real expensive, real quick. Switching from one version of MS Word to another is difficult--going from Word to Open Office would be a nightmare. Plus can your IT/IS departments handle the switch in server/networking software? How much will it cost in time and money to train them? How many will you have to fire/lay off? How many will you have to hire? What software do you need to run? Can you get open source alternatives? Do those alternatives actually work? Or are they buggy pieces of crap with little documentation or support?
Don't get me wrong. I'm a strong advocate of open source software and use it every day. But I would never advocate any IT department switching to open source merely based on initial cost. Any switch has to be done with eyes open knowing the changes you'll have to make and all the added costs that those changes and the extra support you need will add.
He is guilty of aiding our enemies. Wikileaks is clearly a terrorist front hell-bent on destroying our lack of American freedoms, and shinning the light of transparency on the US governments hidden jack-booted thuggery around the world.
Eh? What news? An overpriced music streaming service from Sony? Big whoop. Why in the hell would I pay Sony 60 bucks for the first year (after that it goes up to $120 a year) for a music streaming service when I can get Pandora for $36 a year.
The really sad thing is, that this doesn't look like they're trying to profit from this material (which would make this somewhat understandable). It's almost like they're just pathologically hoarding the copyrights because they can--and to hell with any increase in the market for Bob Dylan's music that some freely available studio out-takes and live tracks might bring.
You're right...but for the wrong reasons. Nobody cared about copyright law because it did not effect them, so they ignored it. The second that any technology came around that allowed them to copy and share something (illegally or not), they used it for that purpose.
No. We know that as long as there is a demand for something there will always be a supply. Example--Have all the anti drug laws reduced the availability of illegal drugs? Not that we've seen--they just made it more profitable to be a supplier.
And it amuses me that an industry that just had another record breaking box office year can claim to be devastated by piracy and have anyone believe it.
Plus, there's the added problem--without anyone telling them, how is Megaupload supposed to "know" these files are infringing. Seeing as how many times the rights holders get it wrong, how can a third party tell what's infringing and what's not? This is why we supposedly have the DMCA--to place the responsibility for identifying infringing content on the rights holders--where it should be, and placing the blame on the person that uploaded it--not some third party who has no way of knowing if the files are infringing or not.
I really don't understand why you think it was a home video player that people wanted--it wasn't. They wanted home video recorders. Pre-recorded movies were an eventual bonus--but not a feature that drew early sales. The studios would have--and did, and still do--fought any device that allowed recording. It wasn't until years after the VCR came out that pre-recorded movies from the studios were both plentiful and affordable. Any playback only device that met the studio's demands would have died a quick death with no media to play and no ability to record--look at the 8-track cassette for an example (even with pre-recorded media the consumers didn't want it).
The truly amusing thing about those definitions is that they are meaningless. Anyone that actually understands guns knows that the functional difference between a semi-automatic hunting rifle (which would be legal under these definitions) and an "assault rifle" (as defined in these laws) is zero. Most of those defining features are all parts that can be added to a legal hunting rifle, making it into an illegal "assault rifle" with about 10 minutes work with some basic tools and after-market parts. The parts of the weapon that fire the bullet are identical between the two.
What a brilliant plan. Let's just waste a bunch of our budget and our officers time harassing ordinary citizens instead of doing any actual police work--like you know...investigating the specific crimes being committed and catching the perpetrators.
Really, all this plan will do is push the crime into areas that aren't being patrolled this way--'cause the cops can't be everywhere.