Hi Tom! On 12/06/07, Tom Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The argument for us for the iPlayer is a bit like the argument for God. Of course, none of us are going to [believe in/use] [God/the iPlayer], we're not that stupid. But the ignorant proletariat out there needs a [comfort blanket/DRM application]. We can't deny them that, regardless of your boorish, high-faultin' academic-y arguments about it's [nonexistence/utter silliness].
We can't forcibly deny them that, but the opportunity cost of maintaining a society of superstition/proprietary software is immense. "Coercive atheism - such as North Korea and former Soviet states - are marked by all that comes with totalitarianism: poor economic development, censorship, corruption, depression, and so on. However, nations marked by high levels of organic atheism, such as Sweden or the Netherlands - are among the healthiest, wealthiest, best educated, and freest societies on earth." - The Cambridge Companion to Atheism http://books.google.com/books?id=tAeFipOVx4MC&pg=PA57&psp=1&sig=pM5T-0bjgXv2YkMmjhKfZ44HN2c
If the iPlayer works, hopefully, all it'll do is distract the bureaucrats and legal types away from what everyone is doing on BitTorrent. That is it's criteria for success - how well it keeps the BBC hierarchy from noticing reality.
For all the problems with the pharmaceutical industry, I much prefer it to the underground dealer network. Being forced underground isn't cool, as anyone who used Napster 1.0 in the weeks before it got shut down will know when they compare it to even today's p2p filesharing systems. -- Regards, Dave - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
