Fezmid

I don't know that I agree with that. I don't think Trump wanted to fire Erin last night. He seemed like he wanted to fire the project manager. But they disagreed, and he went with that they said. That said, how valuable can these two people really be to Trump if he has them follow the contestants around for 4 months out of the year? I mean, honestly. Maybe they WERE important and that's why they were chosen for the gig. But now? I doubt they do much other than the show. Lastly, I don't think Erin's comment ("Do you really need to listen to them?") was any worse than what the PM said when asked who to send back to the suite ("How about me?"). I don't understand why the voiceovers are SOOO terrible though. Not even close to the same sound. Pretty sad. CW

We actually did the opposite. Spent quite a bit on the engagement ring, but then I told her, "We're only going to get a plain gold band for you for your wedding ring; you don't want the wedding ring competing with your beautiful engagement ring." So her band was like $150. Then for mine, I said, "Hey, if you get a really cool engagement ring, why can't I have a nice ring too?" We went to 4 or 5 stores, and I only saw one ring I liked the entire time. Did some research and found out how much the jeweler paid for the ring. Went to the store and offered $100 more than their cost for it. The sales woman got pissed off and started yelling at us and told us to get out of the store. Apparantly I touched a nerve... I wrote a letter to the owner saying how unprofessional she was, told him that my first offer was simply a place to start negotiating. He wrote me back, appologized for the saleswoman's reaction, gave me a fair price (about $400 over their cost, instead of $900 over their cost like they were trying to charge). I went into the store, he appologized in person and made the woman take us into a back room and appologize as well. So I have a cool ring, paid a "reasonable" price and had fun in the process! (I love writing letters to companies that piss me off). Hey, the company that made the ring actually has their website up now (they didn't 3 years ago). Here's a picture of it: http://www.diana.com/prod_detail.php?id_tb_product=219 The description says it's white gold, but I'm pretty sure mine's platinum. I think I had the option of platinum or white gold, and took the plat. I'd have to look at the certificate to be sure though. God I'm bored today.... CW

Speaking of finding stuff in your food... I went to Chi-Chi's about 10 years ago and had a cheese enchalada from the buffet; there were peices of glass in it! Didn't cut me at all, but was very disturbing nonetheless. The restaurant was very appologetic and gave both my meal and my girlfriend's meal for free. Probably could've gotten more if I wanted to sue, but that thought didn't cross my mind. The next day, went to Perkins and there was a rubber washer in my eggs. To make matters worse, they accused me of putting it there. They gave me my meal for free, but not my girlfriend's. Go figure. I stopped going to restaurants for a few weeks after that.... *sigh* CW

Wow, we posted that together. CW

This probably won't be a respected answer, but I'd love to see a tennis match at Center Court in Wimbledon... CW

You mean just like the media? Oh, wait. CW

I'm sure Buffalo could trade up in the draft with Henry. "Hey, we'll give you Henry and our 7th rounder for your 2nd rounder" type of deal. That said, I think we'll be trading with Arizona in the next week or so. CW

Another reason why I didn't want Green. Henry is smart? Huh??? CW

Yeah, my books say that too, yet I don't hear you arguing that I only have a license to use the book, and that the publisher can recall it at any time. I see "strong growth" there. Plus, I bet if you take just the US, the figures are even stronger, as China is a big hotbed of illegally copied music/movies/software/etc. Take them out of the equation, and I bet you're doing even better. Fact is, the indusry is just putting its own spin on things. Why is it that the RIAA pricefixing their CDs didn't really make much noise in the media? They were, in essence, stealing from me by artificially setting prices on CDs and not allowing anyone to sell at a lower pricepoint. Didn't hear much from the media about that, did you? The lawsuit netted me a whopping $20! Download one song off the internet, and you can be sued for $150,000. Where's the equity there? All Rights Reserved just means that you can't do anything that is against the law with it. It's hardly a license agreement. The RIAA (and MPAA) tried to make these things illegal, failed, so now are going to use DRM to take away rights that have already been granted (mainly from the Betamax case). Yes, and it failed miserably because there were other options. The MPAA wasn't solely supporting that, it was a 3rd party effort. Watch what happens when the RIAA/MPAA do it themselves and don't give you an option. Oh, and "Don't buy it," isn't a good answer either. Your analagy is broken; when I buy a CD, I don't own the original work either. I can't split out the vocals from the drum beat. A CD of the Doors is not the original recording from the Doors. It's been mixed. Anyway, we can go round and round all day (and have ). I just wanted people to be aware of the situation so they can form their own opionions on DRM and can then fight or embrace it as they choose. CW

Unfortunately, it's comments like this that help convince people that DRM is a good thing. I honestly don't believe that, at the core, DRM is about piracy. Music and movie sales are at all time highs. It's about wanting complete control of the product and being able to dictate what I can do and for how long I can do it with a peice of media (music and movies specifically). Another way to get recurring income, perhaps forcing people to buy the song every month/year/two years, etc. CW

Havn't heard that, but I know that the RIAA did try to shutdown used CD stores several years ago (10+?). They lost the battle though. This is a similar battle. CW

If you're scared about getting a root canal, here's a link that might help: http://www.stadiumwall.com/index.php?showt...7&hl=root+canal It helped me (somewhat...) Temp crown on that tooth now, permanant one on next Thursday (can't wait). CW

Yes, currently the DRM in iTunes is easy to live with; don't believe for a second that it won't become more restrictive if people don't voice their objections. Currently, yes. What happens if the RIAA decides to only sell music online with restrictive DRM? Exaclty why I should be allowed to make copies for myself. (yes, I currently can but I wouldn't be surprised to see that change as DRM gets more of a foothold; plus, I can't legally copy a DVD right now without circumventing, in essence, DRM). Funny, I just looked over a few CDs that I have, and I don't see any license agreement in there. I also seem to recall seeing commcercials that say, "Own Finding Nemo today," not, "License the right to watch Finding Nemo today!" Sorry, but buying a CD is no different than buying a print (again, I don't see any license agreement in my CD liner book). Why are record labels allowed absolute control over that medium, but painters aren't allowed absolute control over their medium? The Xerox machine allows me to make a perfect reproduction of a print, yet it's not illegal... EDIT: Similar to the painter's print, what about a book that you buy? What if it vanished a year after you bought it. No different than digital DRM where the distributer gets to decide whether they want to delete your file (aka: make it unplayable) or not. And I can make an exact digital copy if I want with a scanner... CW

I talked about it -- those who want to do it will do it with or without DRM. It's been there since day 1 as I mentioned with software copy protection back in the day. I agree that with what you're saying, but there has to be a middle ground. The copyright holders/distrubutors should not have complete power for all of eternity, and the courts have already said that they don't in regards to the Betamax case. http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/betamax/countdown/index.php Of course the Golden Rule looks like it's starting to go into affect - Those who have the gold, make the Rules. CW

While I don't believe in what SDS quoted ("Free love!"), I do believe in this: CW

Ok, I don't know that I'd go quite THAT far... CW

I didn't say that piracy itself was on the fringe -- but that DRM affects much more than just the pirates. Piracy will be just as strong with or without DRM. Software is a great example -- there's been copy protection on games since the early 80's. Guess what? Every one has been defeated (except for Altnerate Reality: The City; I'm pretty sure that one was never hacked... But I digress). The only thing copy protection did was make it so everyday users couldn't backup their software. Get your floppy disk too close to a magnet or bend it the wrong way and bam, you needed to buy a new copy of the software. Because that's ridiculous. However, if I hear the song on the radio there's nothing legally stopping me from recording it for my own use. For example: http://www.griffintechnology.com/products/...shark/index.php This "license to use that we can pull back at any time" is just riduclous though. If you buy a peice of artwork, should the artist be able to take the painting out of your house after a few months if they decide that they don't like it anymore? DRM would allow artists/labels/etc to "revoke" your license, not allowing you to listen to the music or watch the movie that you paid for. It basically gives the consumer no control over anything. CW

I'd love to see the presentation. I'm assuming people aren't going because they want to though? CW

No I wasn't. I think your grandmother could play guard better than this guy can CW

Oooh, we have a winner! CW

I see what you're saying, but "He plays for San Fran, he must suck" works as well. CW

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_rights_management CW

That's just it, it's NOT about piracy. Piracy is on the fringe, but frankly it will always exist in some form. What proposed DRM measures will do is take away all control from the consumers and give it to the RIAA, MPAA, etc. For example, buy a song online, but if you want to listen to it on your MP3 player, you'll have to buy another license... Want to listen to it in your home theater? Another license. Want to listen to it on your PC? Another license. Or something more radical - buy a license to a song, but have the song "expire" after a month. Want to keep listening? Keep paying. IMHO, there's lots of bad stuff in store if people aren't educated about it now. CW

http://ask.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/03/22/2231213 I think everyone knows I'mm against DRM, but there's some interesting ideas being presented on both sides of the fence. I'm sure this can easily be moved to either consumer or PPP, but it can probably live here too since it's such an all-encompassing topic. CW