elis

No, I never tried. This was years ago. I don't even remember the songs. Perhaps I can ask them to check their records. Thanks for the idea.

Interesting. I actually used to use iTunes a lot, but I've lost a lot of music through them. The first time was before I had my iPod, and my old computer died. I had tried to make an mp3 cd of those songs before the compy died, but back then, iTunes didn't allow it. I went to iTunes on my new computer, and I wasn't allowed to re-download the songs I'd already purchased.

I have a lot of issues with iTunes and iPods (how the hell do I transfer music from my iPod to my PC? This is really not clear), but I actually want to pay for music, and so far, it's the best fit for me.

It was really laughable when Sony installed malware on peoples' computers for having legitimately purchased their music cd, and then was unapologetic about it.

I always argue that people should pay for copyrighted material, rather than violate the copyright, but when I read some of the stories about the RIAA's activities, I feel like I'm playing the devil's advocate.

Hey, thanks. Saved me a bit of reading :)

I almost always use a terminal window in the GUI. The programs I am writing aren't graphical though, so they would work just as well in a terminal. The thing is, I write in emacs, and then save it, switch to a terminal window, and run the program. I could easily switch to another terminal in terminal mode, but I have heard that you can run your programs from inside emacs (I think I heard that anyways). I'd rather learn how to do that.

Anyways, I'm going to try this tonight, and see if I can avoid the distractions that my GUI presents me with.

Heh. I just read that article while procrastinating.

He's really spot on though. I don't have a good way to use my laptop on the other side of the room, but I could work in terminal mode, and only switch to my desktop for non-work.

As for the article about the internet killing our brains, I really disagree with a lot of it. I often find that one of the biggest problems of holding my attention is that the subject is simply not interesting.

Often, I'll read an article, even a very deep one, until I realize that it either has no substance, or I come across a big error that needs correcting.

I've read books that were over a thousand pages. Several which were about eight-hundred. The important thing about those books is that they were enjoyable.

The author seemed to dismiss readers who were anti-authoritarian, and anti-expert, regarding literature, as half-baked excuses for our lack of ability to read. This does not apply to me. I don't reject popular or expert approved books because the experts approve them, or because I am unable to read long books. I reject them because I can't force myself to read anything which is uninteresting.

Which I accept may be a problem, but if that is what the author was addressing, then it needs clarification.

At first I was wondering if people would object to this being posted here (I'm not such a person btw), but then I realized, this really is HACKer news.

Also, the boots full of meat really put me off too :)