I don't believe in imaginary property, but I do believe that theft (of actual money) and fraud are wrong. Perhaps if you understood the distinction between imaginary and real property, you could distinguish between fraud and IP infringement.
Meanwhile, we can listen to Congressmen grandstand about how Facebook and Google don't protect our privacy, and how they need to squander tax dollars on investigating their privacy policies.
"Pay no mind to the man behind the curtain [who is searching through your hard drive without probable cause]! Services to which you willingly gave information about yourself may actually be utilizing that information!!!"
And I'm sure that the people you bring over to your house are the type who would be impressed by a $3k stereo (I would be, if it's well put together... which yours probably isn't). Take my mother over to your house, and she wouldn't give a shit. Neither would more than probably 80% (or more) of the people I've met over 40. Those under 20 have never, and will never buy music, and don't seem to care about fidelity. So good for you. No one else cares.
You say that its declared no one cares about quality and never will.... but I've never seen that. I care about quality, and that's why I get FLAC files from ThePirateBay. Once 24-bit files become available on TPB, I'll download those, too. I've spent thousands of dollars on CD's in the past, only to realize that I was a sucker. No more. Kthx.
"Honestly, if the labels are serious about offering higher quality files, they should let people upgrade their existing authorized versions as a thank you for actually paying, instead of getting unauthorized versions."
After I read that line to my wife, she replied, "Well, if they're stupid enough to buy it once..." I almost laughed my ass off.
PS- Techdirt, please make it less of a pain in the @$$ to leave comments on your site. Every single time I try to leave a comment I have to reset my password. Can you just integrate OAuth/Facebook Connect/Disqus/ANYTHING!!!!! I'm tired of logging in to every damn website. Kthx.
...government grants of privilege to be the sole operator in a market. That's it. Without the force of law behind it, there is no way a company can legally keep competitors from entering the market.
In the US, (at least) large companies use lobbyists, IP, and regulatory capture to keep competitors out and protect incumbents. Unfortunately, there isn't a way for large companies to avoid this, as any company which is successful but doesn't pay up to the politicians will have anti-trust probes, etc. launched against them.
The problem isn't the companies, it's the government and greedy politicians who seek to use political power for their own gain.
You are the kind of lame ass jerk that makes the world a (mostly) bad place. I have three kids, and guess what, my kids (even as toddlers) understand entertainment, advertising, and the fact that I as a parent am not going to buy them everything that they see. Kids aren't as stupid as people like you seem to think, and if you bother to take the time to explain things to them (like money/cost, gifts and their context, and the meaning of the word 'no').
Here's the kicker: if something is confusing for my children, or I don't want them to watch it, I simply don't allow them to watch it! Incredible, I know.
If you don't like the way the world is, please stop trying to force your world-view on everybody else, and go live in a cave somewhere, where nobody can bother you. I don't use the government to force programs I don't like off the air, but then again I'm not so self-centered that I believe the world should bow down to my wishes. Your parents probably told you that you were unique and super-special, didn't they, narcissist? Give yourself a trophy and a pat on the back, winner.
I'm all for 30 minute advertisement cartoons. Advertising is what makes content free (for me), as long as it's entertaining, who cares? (spoiler: idiots) I'm so tired of the government dictating what I can or can't watch/do/say/eat/consume. But everyone from bleeding-heart liberals to war-mongering republicans wants the government to get more involved in everything.
BTW, @designerfx, I'm a Christian and plenty tolerant as well.
I couldn't agree with you more! Everyone already pays for the delivery time. When you sign up for internet service, you are offered a variety of speeds, and you choose based on your preferences and needs. This is what the market provides: choice.
If an ISP started throttling certain websites in order to shake them down for money, there would be massive consumer outrage, articles everywhere about how horrible that ISP is, and they would be forced to change.
I could maybe see a scenario, however, where somebody like Google would pay an ISP in order to be able to co-locate a data center with a major backbone in order to obtain faster load times, and I don't think that I would have a problem with it, if it didn't interfere with regular internet traffic. But, I don't think that it would really yield that great of results, Google (and pretty much all websites) load fast as long as you have a decent connection, nowadays.
So, to reiterate, I am for open networks, etc, but I am against the government regulating those networks. Unfortunately, the government already harms Internet accessibility with regulations that grant monopolies to ISPs (cable & telcos) which is the greatest market distortion to the Internet today.
For example, "Baltimore, Chicago, Cleveland,
Columbus, Detroit, Kansas City, Minneapolis, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, and St. Louis, among the larger cities, had at least two telephone services in 1905." http://mises.org/journals/rae/pdf/rae9_2_3.pdf
I could see that, mostly I was referring to anonymous FTP servers anyway, which weren't burdened with security. There were quite a few times when I needed a file or program and was stuck in DOS or a Linux terminal and FTP got me what I needed when nothing else could... But I guess the need for that is pretty much nil nowadays anyway... I think I'm gonna make my kids use Linux without X for the first few years of their computing lives. Okay, maybe not, but it's a thought.
That's a legitimate question. Go read some articles on wired.com to find out! I jest.
I was referring to a few articles I've seen on there about teledildonics, as they refer to it, which is (as I understand it) having a dildo hooked up to the internet so that it can be controlled remotely (via the Internet). They seem to think it's the next greatest thing, I suppose it would be great for those who can't get laid any other way... http://www.wired.com/culture/lifestyle/commentary/sexdrive/2004/09/65064