Tom's Views

In my nearly twenty years of technical work experience, I’ve noted the following qualities, habits, and management styles that made an  effective manager   out of all of those I most enjoyed working for:

1. An effective manager makes cogent statements, yet quickly incorporates new information into his evaluation processes.
2. The most effective manager strongly sticks to his or her positions until new, significant ideas surface that disprove the validity of said positions.
3. An effective manager is expectant yet understanding.  That is, she insists on getting the job done right, but shows compassion and understanding for her workers when they run into legitimate problems meeting her goals.
4. The effective manager is demanding while at the same time, compromising and giving.
5. Soft-spoken firmness characterizes the most effective managers.
6. An effective manager knows how to do the job yet teaches and empowers his employees to do it too.
7. An effective manager is positive but realistic.
8. Effective managers are direct yet sensitive.  They clearly express their expectations and opinions but do so in the least offensive and hurtful ways.
9. An effective manager is happy yet sincere.
10. A most effective manager is easy to please. Yet he instills a sense of true accomplishment among his employees. He never publicly trivializes what his workers accomplish, even if it’s simple or just a small amount.  He never publicly puts down those who report to her.
11. An effective manager is supportive in front of other groups.
12. Competence describes an effective manager. The most effective managers know the important technical details of the tasks that their departments are performing.
13. Effective managers create a positive, low stress work environment, where employees feel valued, respected, and sufficiently challenged.

The most effective managers exhibit all of the traits discussed above. So look for them next time you’re shopping for a new manager. The most productive management styles are easy to spot, especially if you can meet other people working for the manager. Keep the above in mind as well, if you want to learn how to become an effective manager yourself.

Tom Hesley

Related Posts

• Love And Happiness Make Better Workers

I believe we should abolish the death penalty in our justice system because:

1. Once executed, the death penalty is irreversable; even if we later discover that the now-dead person is innocent.
2. There’s no definitive proof that killing capital offenders with the death penalty actually deters crime.
3. The death penalty does not undo the crime. The families of murdered victims often wish the murderer put to death to, as they say,  ”achieve closure.” But the evidence that this helps them make peace with the loss is inconclusive at best. In fact, many survivors get over the tragedy just fine even when the death penalty is not imposed on the murderer.  Killing the killer need not happen therefore, for that peace and closure to occur.
4. We’re not setting good examples by supporting state-sponsored killing. Over half the countries in the world have stopped capital punishment. Yet here in the US, the death penalty remains a valid punishment. Collective America persists in this backward and Old Testament-style thinking of eye-for-an-eye. i.e. He killed. So let’s kill him. Now I’ve always admired the United States for leading the way in positive social reforms, and lighting the pathway out of barbarism for the rest of the world. But on the issue of the death penalty, we’re leading no one.  In fact, we’re trailing far behind the pack ourselves.
5. Evidence is too easily altered in death penalty cases, and quite often in fact, IS altered by zealous detectives, forensic specialists, and lawyers. Fairly implementing capital punishment requires that officials in the judicial system (from police officers all the way up to Supreme Court justices) be, well, just. They should not be corrupt. But many are corrupt and unjust. Consider that lots of death penalty cases have been overturned of late due to the discovery of faked evidence used against defendants by unscrupulous attorneys. The recent commuting of nearly 150 death row sentences proves beyond doubt that our system is just too vulnerable to cheating, to trust it to accurately sort out who lives and dies.
6. Unless we actually see someone commit a murder with our own eyes, how can we in good conscience order their death? As jurors, we never see the crime done. Instead, we must accept on faith that prosecutors and defense lawyers are telling the truth about what happened, and that the conclusions they want us to draw from their evidence are the right ones. But often, they’re wrong; often enough that we should not trust them so much that we’re willing to kill based on their “good word.”
7. Our wide-spread support of the death penalty while also claiming to value human life supremely, makes us appear hypocritical.
8. The death penalty is a collective cop out. We employ it because we don’t want to bother looking for more civilized solutions to the problems of protecting ourselves from hardened criminals. So, we go the easy route, and just kill them. Never mind that we might be wrong. Keep them off the street? Yes. But kill them? Not on your life!
9. The death penalty wastes resources. We could save billions of tax dollars by bringing back the chain gangs, and have these death row prisoners construct roads and railways, lay pipes and broadband lines, and teach us about how and why they sinned as they did, so that we might understand what we’re doing collectively as a society that creates such monsters. But in our short-sightedness, we kill them, and so, miss these learning opportunities. Go figure.
10. The death penalty promotes the idea that at times, it’s okay to kill someone. The thoughts of a potential capital criminal might be, “If society does it, then why can’t I?” Perhaps rarely, it is appropriate to kill. But people want to kill in self defense way too often when other, less drastic ways to leave the situation exist.
11. Proving capital cases beyond a shadow of a doubt is difficult if not impossible, and it’s quite expensive to boot. So if we took the death penalty off the table altogether, we’d also rid ourselves of such lengthy appeals processes and associated costs.
12. The death penalty unfairly puts to death more minorities (non whites) than whites.  Blacks for example are more often sentenced to death for the same crime than whites.

Conclusion: America will not truly have evolved beyond the barbarism of the middle ages until we stop this crazy killing practice that the death penalty mandates.

Tom Hesley

Related Posts

• Illinois Abolished Capital Punishment!

References

• Capital Punishment   on Wikipedia

Low vision, faulty legs or arms, deafness, and the symptoms of simple aging can heap big challenges on people so affected, especially in dating. Further, not only is there the challenge of the disability itself to cope with, but also, the negative ways most non-disabled folks regard the disabled.  Many disabled people report that they’ve struggled over the years to date people they find attractive. The root of that struggle is this: When the non-disabled learn of the disability, they immediately bolt. They avoid dating a disabled person. This generally happens regardless of whether people tell them early on, or hesitate several weeks. No matter how well the non-disabled know the disabled, once they dub the disabled as such, natural selection seems to dictate that any romance that might have been, vanishes forever. Most healthy folks avoid the disabled men. So the disabled might as well become asexual.

Some disabilities hamper more disabled women in this way than disabled men, while for others more men are negatively impacted socially than women.  Just about any disability that impairs a man’s ability to provide well for a woman and family, discourages non-disabled women from dating him.  Likewise, any disability that impairs a woman’s ability to properly birth and raise children
discourages men from dating her.  The result is that most disabled people, regardless of sex, do not regularly date much less marry.  They are left alone and isolated.  While the healthy are lonely as they look for that “perfect mate,” so too are the disabled while they search for that rare person (disabled or not), who accepts them and who does not regard their disabilities as disabilities.

To be sure, the non-disabled (those in perfect health) will often be courteous, and perhaps even pity disabled persons, as they attempt to secure their places in Heaven with God, once their life here on Earth is done. But they’ll likely never seriously date a disabled person. They will rarely be in awe of him.  So, non-disabled women will never see disabled men as acceptable mates. He will never be the “perfect” man in their eyes due to his disability.  Nor will the disabled woman ever become the goddess in his eyes. Not even the holy enticement of the eternally good afterlife makes most of those in perfect health truly love disabled people, and view them as complete equals.

But this is so sad, because dating a disabled person can be one of the most rewarding experiences a mortal can enjoy. I’ve dated numerous disabled women and non-disabled alike in my time. I have found that helping a blind woman locate a coat that she’s misplaced, read a users’ guide for a new appliance, or describe what’s happening on TV screen to someone who cannot see it themselves makes me feel quite useful and needed.  It erases any guilt I might otherwise feel, for being too idle, and fills me with a greater sense of
meaningful purpose.  There is no more justifiable way to spend your hours, than in the service of others.  Indeed, I feel much less lonely while helping.  I sense that I’m truly making a positive difference in the life of a wheelchair-bound person for example, when I push them to lunch, or around the mall as we shop.

Helping others is perhaps the safest, yet most effective antidepressant.  It makes us feel good about ourselves, and the disabled represent a ready-supply of opportunities for helping.  Perhaps people at large would not be so depressed these days, if they’d only help others  little more. People are simply too focused on themselves and what they want for themselves.  This narcissism can leave us feeling quite sad, especially when we so often do not get what we want while believing strongly how much we deserve it.

But dating a disabled person definitely lifts spirits.  While helping them find greater happiness and joy in spite of their plights may not give you precisely what you think you want in life, helping nonetheless will attend well to your rightest needs.  True, you probably won’t make lots of money serving others day-in and day-out.  But you’ll experience increased health; both physical and mental.  You’ll truly get outside of yourself, and thus, observe a much longer-lasting sense of achievement than any job promotion, bigger house, or better car can ever provide.  Plus, you’ll lower your stress levels, as it’s much easier to please someone you’re helping than a cranky boss and his or her ever-increasing expectations of you.  So if you feel sad that you’re not making a bigger positive difference in this world, then by all means consider dating a disabled person.  I believe that the disabled were probably put here to not only test the brawn of compassion in the healthy, but also to help the healthy remain healthy by providing endless opportunities for meaningful service.  So help yourself and the disabled as well.  Date the disabled.  If you have any need whatsoever to give of yourself, you defiitely won’t be sorry.

Tom Hesley

Related Posts

• Darwinism: Bad News For Blind Lovers
• There Is A Place For Pity Love

I’ve owned the 16 GB iPod 6th Generation Nano portable media player from Apple for a few months now. I bought mine at Best Buy for $179, the standard price. Over all, I very much like the 6th generation Nano, though some of the qualities that make this version of the Nano so likeable also contribute to the difficulties in using it.

What I like about the iPod 6th Generation Nano

• The significantly smaller size of this Nano (not much bigger than many watch faces), and its built-in clip on the back allows this Nano to be fastened easily to the cuff of a shirt or arm or wrist band for easy access while walking or jogging. It’s size and function remind me of the iPod Shuffle.
• The sound quality is every bit as good on the 6th generation Nano as in Nanos past. In fact, the ear buds that come with this Nano appear to be the same as those shipped with previous models.
• Unlike the 4th and 5th generation Nanos, this iPod incorporates a full implementation of the VoiceOver feature; the earlier versions utilized a voice clip system that required significant extra time during syncing as the computer had to generate the voice clips for each song synced. This drawback does not exist in VoiceOver however. VoiceOver is a feature that Apple has incorporated into the iPhones and iPod Touches historically. But as of this Nano, VoiceOver has now come to the Nano family. The voice synthesis software now is a part of the Nano. So this Nano does not require computer generation of voice clips during syncing. This feature enables the blind and vision impaired listeners to operate the Nano without seeing the screen; a handy feature for a touch screen based user interface to have.
• This 6th generation Nano contains a sweet-sounding stereo FM radio. You can pause it for some seconds without missing anything when you return to listening. Plus, you can save songs that you hear to purchase them from the iTunes store later.
• You can make a clock face appear so that when the home key is pressed, this iPod looks just like a watch face that includes a sweep second hand that moves smoothly around the numbers (not in one-second intervals as seen in so many quartz clocks and watches).
• Battery life in my experience seems comparable to my 4th generation Nano; the internal battery lasts between fifteen and twenty hours roughly per charge.  This is highly variable however, depending on how bright you have the screen backlight set, how long it glows after being touched, how loud you play the Nano, and so on.
• The online documentation provided on Apple’s web site   here,   is thorough, well-written, and easy to read.
• Syncing and managing this iPod via iTunes works just as it did for the previous Nano generations.
• You can organize your “desk top” on this Nano easily (move icons around on and amongst the various pages).
• You can edit existing playlists and create new ones as well right on this Nano, without plugging it into iTunes. This is a new feature in the 6th generation Nano.
• I like the idea of the built-in pedometer to measure how far one has walked. But I’ve not yet utilized this feature.

What I dislike about the iPod 6th Generation Nano

• Though the smaller footprint of this 6th generation Nano facilitates ease of use while exercising, it can irritate; especially if you forget where you last put this Nano. This tiny player can easily slip between pillow cushions or slide underneath couches and such. Thus, it can easily be lost, and when you’re looking for it, it’s easy to overlook due to its low profile.
• I indeed miss the function wheel found on all previous generations of the Nano. This one offers a small touch screen instead. I like the touch screen well enough, but very much miss the wheel.
• Skipping around in your music requires more presses and touches than previous incantations of the Nano. The older Nanos only required one press of the wheel to advance or move backward in the playlist; even when the screen is off. But this iPod requires you to first activate the screen by pressing the home button at the top right of the unit, then to touch the screen once to bring up the player controls. Then, you must touch the right place on the screen to advance or go backward. A bit awkward.
• They eliminated the built-in camera that they added in the last generation Nano. I can’t cry too much over this however, as all I ever used the camera for was to check my advancing bald spot.
• I found it curious that they eliminated video playback functionality in this Nano, though the 5th generation Nano could do this.
• As in all previous Nanos, the charge cable and earphone cable connectors are very close to each other so that disconnecting the charge cable without first unplugging the earphone jack is virtually impossible.
• Getting used to the “gestures” required to operate this Nano (the swipes, taps, and presses) proved a bit of a challenge at first. But it didn’t take long to master, although I’m still not as proficient with this as I was with the wheel from previous generations of Nanos.
• I would have liked to see more flash memory included (at least 32 GB; not just 16 GB).

For my purposes, which involve mainly audio music listening while exercising, I’ve found no better portable players than the iPod 6th generation Nano; except for perhaps the 5th and 4th generation models.  Apple made many counter-intuitive omissions on this iPod (the deletion of the video playback and camera). Perhaps they figured that people weren’t using these features much on the 5th generation Nano given the small size of the screen. As mentioned, I’m also sorry to see the function wheel go. So far, as a result, this iPod seems harder to work than previous models. But perhaps with time, I’ll get used to it. I’ll let you know. However, I still find myself grabbing my 3rd generation Nano for many of my walks, because it has a function wheel (and a big one at that), along with the associated improved ease of use that the wheel offers. I must force myself to take the 6th generation Nano with me, which should not be the case.

But in terms of sound quality and overall performance, this 6th generation Nano is second to none. So I’d recommend buying it, as it offers a pretty affordable means to get into portable digital music for novice listeners, and its advanced sound quality will please even the most discriminating audiophiles. Remember however, that you must use a computer (PC or Mac) to put music on it initially. But computers are probably second nature to anyone considering purchasing a Nano anyhow. So this is no big deal.

I’ll update this piece as I learn more about my 6th generation Nano.

Tom Hesley

References

• Apple iPod 6th Generation Nano Users Guide

I’ve tried (and yes, typically over-indulged in) numerous versions of vanilla ice cream through the years. So I’ve learned what both good and bad vanilla ice creams taste like.  Breyers is good.  Indeed, this  Breyers Natural Vanilla flavored All Natural Ice Cream ranks at the top of the list  in terms of consistency, price, and taste. There’s certainly nothing plain about this vanilla ice cream.  My thoughts on this light yet delicious dessert follow.

What I liked about Breyers Natural Vanilla All Natural Ice Cream

• This Breyers  ice cream looks virtually like vanilla (cream white in color) because they seemed not to color it. The ingredients listed on the label make no mention of food colorings or dies.
• They hit a pleasing balance between the vanilla, sugar, and dairy flavors in this vanilla ice cream from Breyers. It’s not overly sweet, but still sugary enough to be addictive.  I never get tired of this stuff.
• This Breyers all natural ice cream comes with numerous and small bits of vanilla bean, which probably strengthens its vanilla flavor as well as accentuates its “all  natural” appearance.
• The price I paid ($3 per pint) seems reasonable.
• I like the lightness of this all natural ice cream.  Though this can at times leave me wanting for more when I’ve devoured the entire pint, I’m actually glad that they incorporate an airiness into this ice cream, that makes it less fatty and caloric.
• At 4 grams of saturated fat per serving (and there are four  servings in the sixteen ounce container), I get just shy of my entire day’s allotment.  Again, that’s pretty light for ice cream.
• This product contains no corn syrup either.
• In fact, the ingredients list is very short: milk, cream, sugar, natural vanilla flavor, natural tara gum (to increase the creaminess of the ice cream).
• Each serving has only 14 grams of sugar and 130 calories, and thus 56 of sugar grams for the whole container of 4 servings and 520 calories. It could be lower, yes, but as far as ice creams go, this amount is not excessive.
• The black, yellow, green, and white colors on the package make Breyers vanilla ice cream easy to spot in your grocer’s freezer.
• The pictures of the product shown on the outside of the container do not exaggerate or downplay the ice cream’s actual appearance.  Breyers seems to have been very honest in their pictorial as well as descriptive portrayals of this product.  I like honesty to be sure.

What I disliked about Breyers Natural Vanilla All Natural Ice Cream (Not much!)

• I wish they’d use unbleached cane juice for a sweetener, instead of sugar.

In summary, I found this Breyers natural vanilla bean ice cream outstanding, and would highly suggest it to anyone seeking light yet satisfying flavors from their desserts. It satiates with about the right amounts of every ingredient, without going overboard on anything. So try Breyers when next you desire some all-natural ice cream. Like me, I’m betting you’ll enjoy this ice cream immensely.

Tom Hesley

Related Posts

• Edy’s Maxx Mint Brownie Ice Cream Review
• Haagen-Dazs Mint Chip All Natural Ice Cream Review

I’ve eaten the various incantations of these Mrs. Paul’s Fish Sandwich Fillets for the past thirty years.  Note that this particular product differs from the Mrs. Paul’s Crunchy Fish Fillets that I reviewed here, in that there are fewer fillets per box (6 instead of 10), each fish sandwich fillet is close to twice the amount as the crunchy fillets. Here are my thoughts on this delicious supper-time main course:

What I like about Mrs. Paul’s Fish Sandwich Fillets

• The sandwich fish fillets themselves are packed in a re close-able plastic bag for freshness, and this bag keeps them from picking up odors of, and then assuming the flavor of other foods in the freezer.
• These Mrs. Paul’s sandwich fillets are 100% Alaska Pollock fish; without fillers.  Alaska Pollock is a mild-tasting yet full-bodied fish (at least, as satisfying as whitefish can be anyhow).  So it accommodates flavoring spices well without dominating the dish, and therefore, compliments other foods well.
• These breaded, crunchy fish fillets especially designed for kaiser or hamburger rolls from Mrs. Paul’s, have a hunger-enticing, not-too-fishy flavor.
• You can be re-close the box with built-in tabs that fit into slots on the top flap once you’ve re-sealed the inner bag.
• This breaded fish has lots of omega-3 fatty acids, that are excellent for promoting heart health.
• While baking, the fish fillets give off a mouth-watering aroma, so that when they’re finally ready to eat, I’m really anxious to devour them.   This aromatic preamble makes actually eating them even more of a delectable treat.Frank’s hot sauce goes well with these Mrs. Paul’s sandwich fish fillets; my favorite topping to put on them actually.
• I follow the twenty-eight to thirty minutes in the oven at 425 degrees instructions on the box that in my oven at least, predictably yields very hot, quite crunchy, and golden brown sandwich fish fillets.

What I dislike about Mrs. Paul’s Fish Sandwich Fillets

• There’s no indication on the box that these Mrs. Paul’s fish sandwich fillets have been tested for mercury.  Doing that would be comforting for consumers, given the concern these days over heavy metals in the food supply.  But I’ve eaten these for long enough now without discernible problems, that I’m not worried about mercury in fish.
• Each serving (one fillet) has 190 calories.  Yet I must eat three or four servings to really feel satisfied.  The breading no doubt add lots of extra calories but on the good side, is made from wheat flower.
• Mrs. Paul’s makes the breading from enriched flour.  I’d prefer that they use all whole grains in their seasoned coatings.The flour they apply appears to be bleached, though it does not say bleached on the box.
• They also have added sugar and preservatives.  So these fish sandwich fillets definitely qualify as one of those “dreaded” processed dishes.
• These frozen fish fillets do not heat up well in the microwave.  In fact, the box recommends against microwave preparation.  But an ability to “nuke” them would shorten preparation time significantly.

Though they could be better if prepared with whole grain flour and without sugar, Mr’s Paul’s fish sandwich fillets are good eating nonetheless so long as you don’t gorge on them too often.  Over all, I truly love the flavor of Mrs. Paul’s breaded fish fillets, including these fish sandwich fillets.  They cost little, are easy to fix, taste delicious, and are on the whole quite good for you.  So I’d highly recommend them to anyone hungry for the taste of good fish.  If you’re a fish lover as I am, you’ll be quite pleased with the meals in which you serve these Mrs. Paul’s Fish Sandwich Fillets.

Tom Hesley

Related Posts

• Gorton’s Garlic and Herb Crunchy Breaded Fish Fillets Review
• Mrs. Paul’s Crunchy Fish Fillets Review

Some claim that the difficulty with   American socialism is that eventually, you run out of other people’s money to redistribute.  Yes, there’s some truth to that.  However, one big  problem with capitalism, more than in socialism, is that greedy entrepeneurs eventually jip you out of your money.  Perhaps consumers can protect themselves from being ripped off; to a degree.  But even if the buyer is fully aware and purchases smartly, predatory companies still routinely hide scams from public view;  in fine print, in hype, and in dishonest business practices.  Capitalism rewards greed, selfishness, and dishonesty, which in urn, encourages and perpetuates these all-too-common yet undesirable human raits.

Living standards are thought to be better here in America than in most other places, yes. But only a segment of this higher standard could be directly attributed to capitalism. Additionally, we have a fairer and more extensive justice system here than exists in most of the places from which immigrants to The US hale. Education is greater here. So too is our health care system; an institution that’s as advanced as it is due in significant part to government-funded research and regulation (not capitalism). Further, the American work place as well as her streets are safer as well due to OSHA, police forces, and other government regulatory institutions (again, not capitalism). In short: Our institutionalized and systemic concern for human welfare also draws immigrants here; much more than simply capitalism.

I would prefer no abuse of my funds at all; whether that be institutional (government) OR individual (greedy capitalist).  It’s not clear that there’s any less abuse of resources in capitalism however, than in American socialism.  By today’s standards, the capitalist notion that if a man does not work, then he should not eat, is barbarous. Why?  Because it attributes too much blame on, and then punishes in overly harsh ways, the less fortunate. Some people in fact cannot work, and particularly today, many cannot find jobs so that they COULD work. So would you suggest that these folks should not eat?  Indeed, if not for the generosity of society, we’d be hearing lots more about people starving to death in these tough economic times. But I’m glad that that’s not generally the case however, here in America.  One reason that immigrants come here in droves, is that they know that they probably won’t starve if they’re not able to find work.

Now, to be sure, personal gain (profit) is ONE potent incentive that spurs innovation and technological advance.  But it’s not the ONLY motivator however. A sheer personal interest in advancing civilization and solving problems is also a key stimulant for positive change. People accomplish greatness all the time; even when there’s not much monetary profit in it for them personally (starving artists, public school teachers, volunteers of all kinds, and perhaps the best example: soldiers in the military, who put their lives on the line every day, though they’re only paid a pittance). There is much joy in giving and sharing beyond the promise of lots of money in return. But the philosophy of capitalism seems to discourage and ignore that whereas socialism depends on that.

The dubious role of the profit motive in the development of medicine makes pharmaceutical companies untrustworthy in my opinion. In recent times it’s common to hear that a medicine has been misrepresented, works better than it actually does, has previously-concealed side effects, bears a long list of disclaimers, and that safety regulations during testing were ignored in the rush to get the drug to market.  In short, in the medicine case as well as most other areas of business where competition is fierce: There’s a grave downside to profiteering (capitalism) that should not be dismissed; no matter how big the potential profits might be.

Finally, in addition to “free enterprise,” the country was also founded on the biblical principles of loving one’s neighbors and helping those in need. Thus, colonial Americans were much more than just a bunch of money-mongering selfish individuals who were obsessed with maximizing personal gain. Concern for “the common good” and the welfare of neighbors were important aspects of a young America as well.  So let’s not overestimate the positive role that capitalism played in the rapid industrial development of America as an economic superpower.  There was in fact, much more to it than simple greed.

Tom Hesley

Related Posts

• Immigrants Must Adapt?
• Sad Immigrants
• US Heslthcare Reform Debate

I’m heavily into music listening, manipulating the music files for better sound, DJing for friends, and so on.  So very often, the issue of   music piracy   comes up, when people ask that I copy some of the songs in my music collection for them.  The following are my responses and reasoning for why I do not copy music for anyone, period. 

• The record industry could sell music cheaper if not for all the music piracy and having to recover the losses from that stealing.
• Barring the differences between how music piracy and other forms of theft are physically carried out, music piracy is identical to shoplifting.
• The fact that music piracy is easier to perpetrate than other forms of shoplifting may make it even more wrong to execute, not less wrong. 
• It seems that it’s more wrong to take advantage of a person or an industry that cannot adequately defend itself against such theft.  Put another way: It would certainly be more offensive to steal from a blind man than to steal from someone that is fully aware of what you’re doing; though stealing in both cases is equally wrong. 
• One estimate that store prices for CDs is are ten to twenty percent higher than they’d be without shoplifters.
• We all pay for music piracy.  But some pay far less than others.  This implies a major travesty.  The honest people (those who are unwilling to cheat by making illegal copies of music) pay the most therefore, for music.  But unfortunately the music robbers pay the least because through the very act of stealing the music, they circumvent all the measures the music industry could take to fully collect on the music they sell.
• Some justify giving copies of the music on the CDs they own to others by citing how rich some artists have become, and how making copies of their music would not hurt them significantly.  But the most popular artists tend to be pirated the most, as their music is in the highest demand. 
• Besides, how rich or poor the victim of theft is does not affect the rightness or wrongness of the theft.  Stealing is always wrong whether you steal from a king, or a janitor. 
• Would it be any more right to steal a mink coat from a well-to-do store such as Macey’s, than to steal a candy bar from that mom and pop establishment down the street?  
• The music industry appears to be in rapid decline due in large part to the rampant music piracy that plagues it.  This is sad, because I’m a big fan of recorded music, and I fear that this decline in revenue share will eventually trigger a decline in availability and overall quality of the music that is produced. 
•  In 1999 through 2002, the music industry saw a 25% recession in its legal sales and distribution of recorded music  (details here).  With poor economic growth prospects so ubiquitous these days across most industries, and since music is fast becoming perceived as one of those luxury items that people can do without if their finances say that they must, the music industry continues to suffer recession today in 2011. 
• Music piracy is dishonest because those who obtain the music in this way do not have to work as hard to get it as those who actually pay for legal copies. 
• The music pirates get the music for nothing essentially, and where’s the fairness in that? 

As is hopefully quite obvious by now, I’m strongly opposed to music piracy for the reasons given, and many others besides. 

Tom Hesley

Related Posts

• Giving Away Copied Music Is Stealing!

References

• History of Music Piracy   on Wikipedia
• Music Piracy   definition on Wikipedia
• Music Piracy Stats   from the RIAA  

Even if you make no money from   giving away copies of your music,   you’re still   stealing the music   because you’re costing the industry money by giving people music who then, need not buy it themselves.  The fact that you’re making no profit from this musical giveaway is no defense.  Even though you do not benefit from this musical theft, make no mistake that you’re nonetheless just as culpable for stealing music. 

Giving away copies of your purchased music thus, translates into lost revenue for the music industry.  Indeed since digital music has become so widely available, and so easily copied, the music industry has significantly shrunk in terms of how much sales revenue it generates.  A record company executive on CNN a while back talked of all the lay-offs that have occurred because of this sort of widespread music piracy. 

Also, you can’t be altruistic with something that’s not yours to give away in the first place.  When you buy a CD (compact disc), you’re not buying distribution rights to that music; only the right to retain, back up, and listen to it yourself.  The actual music is not yours to pass around, even though you bought a copy of it.  This “kindness” to one group (our friends) is hurting another group (the people who produce and sell the music).  Admittedly, few music industry lawyers would come after you for giving copies of music to a few friends.  But this giving-is-still-stealing principle still applies. Ironically, though your act of giving away music may be well-intentioned, this giveaway is stealing nonetheless.  In short: You should not give away something that’s not yours because any kindness contained in this giving act is more than offset by the wrongness of the implied theft. 

Now with all that said, I believe that Apple went too far with its DRM (digital rights management) schemes.  DRM as it was prevented us from playing our music on more than a few computers at a time, it supplied audio and video file formats that could only be played on iPods, and it barred us from easily converting the DRM-encoded music into other formats.  But I’m certain that Apple had to devise DRM to get the music industry to agree to allow them to sell the music in the iTunes music store.  So, Apple was not the only party responsible for the overly restrictive implements of digital rights management of media / music files. 

Further, this whole business about having to buy a ringtone from the industry just so you can get a song onto your cell phone is crazy.  If I already own the music, why should I have to pay for it again just to get it in ring-tone format? 

IMHO, people abused the free availability of “copyable” music, and the industry over-reacted by making it too hard for honest people to manage their music libraries as they wish.  I’m glad that the trend is away from DRM.  But that won’t last if people keep making illegal copies of music and distributing them to friends.  Copying an iTunes library (or any other music repository) is illegal if you don’t own the copyrights to the music in it.   You’re not allowed to copy music from someone else, even for a short time.

Tom Hesley

Related Posts

• How To Copy Songs From Multiple iPods Into iTunes Library
• Music Piracy Thoughts

There are ways to   copy songs   from one or more   iPods   into your   iTunes library, even if you do not have the original copies of the music in your iTunes library.  WARNING: You’d be breaking copyright laws by duplicating music that you do not own; particularly if you distribute said music to others by syncing it to their iPods.  Advice: If you didn’t pay for it or create it yourself, then do not copy it.  Even if you paid for it, still, do not distribute the music. 

But if you still wish to proceed, then one way to copy the music goes as follows and involves two basic steps: 

1. First, copy the music from each iPod to your computer and import it into your iTunes library. 
2.  Then, copy or sync the desired music from your computer to whatever iPod(s) you wish. 

Step 1 is tricky, because for one, you won’t be able to play any DRM (digital rights management) protected music from the iPod it originally came from on the destination iPod.  For those songs, you’d have to get the original owner to burn them onto a standard CD and give it to you to import into your iTunes library.  Or, you could pay extra money to iTunes to remove the DRM.  Then you could copy them as described below.  But, if we’re only talking about a few total songs, copying them to CD and then importing that CD into your iTuens library is probably the easiest.  I’ve done this many times.

Now with that said, and you decide that there are too many recordings to copy by burning to CD, you can follow the steps below.  I’ve tested this procedure myself and it seems to work well:

1. We’ll call one iPod the source iPod, because it’s the one that has the music you want to copy.  We’ll call your iPod the destination iPod, since this is where the music you desire will ultimately end up. 
2. First, make sure that the source iPod is set to manually manage music and videos.  Do this by plugging this iPod into the computer that originally initialized this iPod (the computer from which the music on the source iPod came) and checking the “Manually manage music and videos” check box.
3. Check the “Enable disk management” box in the same screen.
4. Eject and disconnect the source iPod.
5. Take the source iPod to your computer and plug it into that computer.
6.  Then, on your computer, find the source iPod’s drive in Windows Explorer.
7. Copy the folder called ‘iPod_Control’ to your local hard drive.
8. Once that copy operation finishes, select the ‘iPod_Control’ folder in Windows Explorer and pull up its Properties window.
9. Eject and disconnect the source iPod, as you’ll have no further need of it.
10. In the Attributes section of the resulting Properties window, uncheck the Hidden checkbox and click the Apply button.
11. Bring up iTunes on your computer if it’s not running already.
12. Now you’ll have to decide if you want to copy the files from the iPod_Control directory you just created into your iTunes library or not.  Set this option as you desire by going to EditàPreferences.  In the Advanced tab, the checkbox for this is called “Copy Files to iTunes Music folder when adding to library”.  If you don’t copy them, then you must retain the iPod_Control folder you just created.  If you do check this box, then iTunes copies all music files into its internal library.  Done this way, you can delete the itunes_control folder after the importation completes.
13. To start that importation, in iTunes, go to the FileàAdd Folder To Library… menu item.
14.  In the resulting Browse For Folder dialog box, locate the iPod_Control folder you just copied to your hard drive in step 7 above and select it.
15.  Then press OK.  iTunes then begins importing the files in the iPod_Control directory into your iTunes library.
16. Note that this will not copy the play lists on the iPod; only the music files.  You’ll have to organize the music into play lists in iTunes later if you so desire.
17. Once the importation is done, plug in the destination iPod to your computer that now holds the desired music, and copy or sync whatever you want from your iTunes library to it.  Since your iTunes library now contains the music you want to copy, you’ll be able to copy or sync It from there to the destination iPod.

WARNING: You’d be breaking copyright laws by duplicating music that neither you nor your brother-in-law own.  Advice: If you didn’t pay for it or create it yourselves, then don’t copy it.

Tom Hesley

Related Posts

• Giving Away Copied Music Is Stealing!

References

• http://it.toolbox.com/blogs/ontherun/how-to-copy-music-from-your-ipod-to-your-itunes-library-5615
• http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/250743