Slashdot Mirror

I wonder how many of those other submitters also conveniently "forgot" to point out that the article specifically mentions that a patch was released yesterday.

Found in the Linux kernel. Play with it, bench it, enjoy it. 'nough said, eh?

Microshaft still OWNZ JOO!

last update was june 15

What happens when they make your cds "rip-proof"? See Here.

Anthropology in the News has links to a lot more news stories on these findings. The BBC story is very short, but noteworthy for including a little bit of information on the dating methods used in the Australian case.

Anthropology in the News updates a lot and doesn't keep stuff on its front page for very long, so for the sake of Slashdot's archives, I'm copying the links here.

• New Evidence in Extinction Whodunnit BBC (6/7/01)
• Humans Linked to Animal Extinction New York Times (6/7/01)
• Humans Linked to Animal Extinction Yahoo (6/7/01)
• Human Hunters Spelled Doom for Ice Age Behemoths Yahoo (6/7/01)
• Humans Blamed for Ancient Extinctions MSNBC (6/7/01)
• Planet Was Too Small for Man and Beasts, Study Finds Dallas Morning News (6/8/01)
• Humans Hunted Mammals to Extinction in North America Eureka Alert (6/7/01)

MSNBC

More MSNBC

ZDnet

Cancerpage.com

More recent idg.net story supposedly proving the link

One relating to cell towers which mentions the phones

Ok, there's LOT's of studies going on, and most of them are highly political in my opinion.

Most of them also seem to ignore the fact that RF is RF. Changing what "mode" it's in isn't going to change the physical nature of the signal. All digital cell phones do is use a a/d convertor to convert your voice to a digital form, then it's serialized into a form that can be transmitted on a antenna. This usually means somewhere it get's translated to audio that sounds a little like a modem.

Also, RF has been around since BEFORE we were. Sure, humans have only been pumping out RF for about 80 years, but the earth, the planets and the sun ALL produced some form of RF or EM radiation. We are exposed to it everyday.

One last link describes brain cancer and the fact that noone knows WHAT causes it yet. My point is, scientists too often will point to new technology as the cause of something that just might be a cyclical thing in nature that can not be explained. Why do some people get cancer when they follow the American Cancer Society diet and exercise regimen and have no risk factors (family history of, working in a risky environment..etc.)? Noone knows. Noone will ever know the entire story on this one. All I do know is noone has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt either way. I will assume, for my use, that it doesn't cause it for now mainly because there are more studies refuting the link then studies with HARD evidence proving the link. I also fully believe once this has been studied more, that more people will come to believe as I have. I and many others await those studies. Also, this givesme one less thing to worry about, which helps my stress level! :)

MSNBC

More MSNBC

ZDnet

Cancerpage.com

More recent idg.net story supposedly proving the link

One relating to cell towers which mentions the phones

Ok, there's LOT's of studies going on, and most of them are highly political in my opinion.

Most of them also seem to ignore the fact that RF is RF. Changing what "mode" it's in isn't going to change the physical nature of the signal. All digital cell phones do is use a a/d convertor to convert your voice to a digital form, then it's serialized into a form that can be transmitted on a antenna. This usually means somewhere it get's translated to audio that sounds a little like a modem.

Also, RF has been around since BEFORE we were. Sure, humans have only been pumping out RF for about 80 years, but the earth, the planets and the sun ALL produced some form of RF or EM radiation. We are exposed to it everyday.

One last link describes brain cancer and the fact that noone knows WHAT causes it yet. My point is, scientists too often will point to new technology as the cause of something that just might be a cyclical thing in nature that can not be explained. Why do some people get cancer when they follow the American Cancer Society diet and exercise regimen and have no risk factors (family history of, working in a risky environment..etc.)? Noone knows. Noone will ever know the entire story on this one. All I do know is noone has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt either way. I will assume, for my use, that it doesn't cause it for now mainly because there are more studies refuting the link then studies with HARD evidence proving the link. I also fully believe once this has been studied more, that more people will come to believe as I have. I and many others await those studies. Also, this givesme one less thing to worry about, which helps my stress level! :)

Wow, here I am living in a country that was founded on communism! I had no idea! I mean, it was our forefathers that wrote corporate law, and understood the need to protect democracy against the plutocratic nature of capitalism. If I remember correctly, it was Benjamin Franklin (he owned a newspaper business, you know) who commented that an unregulated business could amass huge amounts of money, and without restrictions on rights and ownership, it could corrupt our government -- burying it in greed, and it would own the very medium through which people could ever hear about their crimes.

What a nutcase! Damn communist, that's what he was.

We've seen this before at NBCi with their QuickClick thing. Here's an article from MSNBC (!) about why such things are evil.

Art At Home

We've seen this before at NBCi with their QuickClick thing. Here's an article from MSNBC (!) about why such things are evil.

Art At Home

Here is what your comment would look like with the new SmartTag technology turned on in IE with Microsoft conveniently adding their own links.

Broadband has been "just around the corner" for 15 years or so.

There is every reason to suspect it'll be just around the corner for another 10.

Dvorak is in the Cassandra role here. Pointing out that broadband isn't here yet won't stop companies from creating buisness models based on broadband access. All it'll do is allow Dvorak to say "I told you so" when the inevitable happens.

Sometimes being right is a thankless role.

--Shoeboy

And what exactly was deceptive?

"This year's hottest new star!" (for Heath Ledger of "A Knight's Tale") and "another winner!" (for The Animal") don't say anything at all. They don't say anything bad about any other movie. They don't promise you'll enjoy the film. They don't even say that either of the films were good.

I don't see how anything they did violated any laws. Possibly the trust of the people, but give me a break, who trusts commercials? Or movie reviews? The MSNBC (oooh! reliable trustworthy news in itself!) article says it all:

"The real question is why Sony had to conceive the counterfeit critic to begin with..."

The article goes on to say that film reviewers are bought and fed appropriate quotes as a standard practice.

Now that I think about it, the invention of a fake reviewer wasn't such a bad idea. Maybe it was political commentary by some jaded ad creative. Or possibly just desperation. The end result is a nothing. Just a bunch of embarrassed LA film execs. Nothing the FTC would worry about.

(oh yeah. I have a degree in Advertising.)

Examples: Fresh! Outrageous! Scintillating! Achingly Funny! This Summer's [fill in movie name]!

If you still pick your movies based on what reviewers say (or worse yet, excerpted quotations), then check out this story.

http://www.msnbc.com/news/581770.asp

The only crime the woman, Gail Atwater, was charged with was the seatbelt violation.

Check out this MSNBC thingy for more information, if you so desire.

I'm glad to see my rights eroded.. makes me feel all warm inside.


Brant

This is my problem with the Libertarian party, and you've summed it up nicely. They understand what's right and what's wrong, but they're so misguided by anti-government rhetoric that they blind themselves to any possibility that a greedy, money-making machine, might be as big a problem as an oppressive government. Corporations are made up of people with rights like you and I, but the 'fascist government' you despise gave the corporation itself, the rights of an individual. A soulless machine with profit as it's only priority, has the same constitutional rights as a person with morals and ethics. These 'benefits' are bought and paid for, but despite the fact that they're sold by a corrupt government (that I imagine you agree is a problem), liberals can't see beyond a starry-eyed dream of 'capitalism in a free market'. At least, not long enough to admit that Corporate America is just as problematic. The founding fathers wrote corporate law for a reason, and it became unenforceable when corporations won the rights of a person. We can't restrict people from owning more than one home or business, we can't restrict their free speech, or their right to support an elected official with their hard-earned money. So now we can't Viacom/Infinity from owning half the radio stations in the country; now laws that regulate how many they can own are being misconstrued and shot down as 'unconstitutional'. We can't keep corporations from burying our government in bribes, because the money they spend is protected by the freaking 1st amendment! And when they use their mass-media ownership to give the entire country breaking news on crib safety instead of corporate welfare, there's nothing we can do but pile up on the couch and kiss democracy good-bye -- because corporate america is the American dream! A pristine ideal of profit in the free world! Besides, who cares about a little plutocaracy? If we don't watch dateline tonight our babies might die!!

/vent

....Aimee Deep. Aimee Deep is the daughter of the boss @ Aimster, and the girl on Aimster.com. See this MSNBC article for more info.

I'd have to disagree slightly about the motivation being wealth generation/accumulation, but concur with the reprehensible and destructive quality of this trend.

This morning, I caught this article on MSNBC about our Republican whitehouse wanting to seize private property to give it to electric companies

("Sorry Bob, but it's been a rough couple of months for PG&E executives and shareholders. It's only fair that we take your farm to help them thru the tough times.")

This is as disturbing, if not more, than former Clinton whitehouse private property seizures for national parks.

Who's looking out for the little guy when both parties are robbing him blind?

And last night, watching PBS's Islam: Empire of Faith, I was surprised to learn how Islam encouraged, cultivated and "open sourced" tremendous amounts of knowledge to the world - releasing it in numerous languages and promoting the distribution of paper-based texts.

No wonder they kicked butts for hundreds of years...

Somehow, the knowledge and property grab by large corporations seems entirerly inconsistent with the development of civilization, but I don't think you'll find wealth-generation as the motivation.

Small entrepreneurs pursue wealth-generation - heck, I'd expect most folks wouldn't mind improving their personal income a bit. But their wealth-generation is a means to a more comfortable end, not a means to raw, unadulterated power grab.

Instead, it's the major corps that have helped themselves to the PTO raid, greased both parties, created wonderful intellectual property scams like the Cybersquatting law and various other amusements, and in general, looted public and others private property.

So please... don't give the aspiration and achievement of financial security and success the blame for this theft. Call it what it is.

*scoove*

This story from MSNBC would seem to confirm the BBC story.

I think this was kept quiet til after the fact to avoid the uproar it will cause from stopping the experimental procedure from happening. *I* think they took the wrong approach.

But as in Star-Link, as we say here, hindsight *is* 20/20. These will not be monster-babies, but what other things are private institutes waiting to spring on us?

This story from MSNBC would seem to confirm the BBC story.

I think this was kept quiet til after the fact to avoid the uproar it will cause from stopping the experimental procedure from happening. *I* think they took the wrong approach.

But as in Star-Link, as we say here, hindsight *is* 20/20. These will not be monster-babies, but what other things are private institutes waiting to spring on us?

Story w/out annoying Flash ad here.

Wired also has the story.

I love the preemptive strike (although I worry about Boies' track record as of late), but what I love the most is how one of the founders pimps out his 16 year old daughter! She is cute though...what do you think /.ers (asked w/ no fear now that I know that 95% of you are also male)?

A Link so everyone can read it and know, yes it is.

I have a hard enough time when the US auctions off used, 15 - year old aircraft carriers to developing nations, although there's little I can do to stop it.

This thing flew less than 5 years ago, and China has already been known to buy Russian space technology for its own use. This capsule is said to be fully loaded. Can we trust Russia to strip American proprietary secrets out of the capsule before this blue - light special? Can we be guaranteed that it won't end up in the hands of some terrorist?

OK, this isn't designed to be a weapons grade device, but are we certain that there is NO enabling technology that, say, Iran or Iraq can use for their purposes?

THis isn't to say that forign nationals are bad, but we'd do well to acknowledge at least these two things:

Russia is still arguably an unwise place to do business

There are more than a few places where they don't tale a lot of pride in the the American flag

"The Russian hackers drew the ire of the FBI when hundreds of emails were sent to agents. Translated, all of the messages read 'All Your Base Are Belong To Us'."

Those wacky Russians.

ZDnet, MSNBC and porn star Danni Ashe (how can you argue with her?), all disagree completely with that article. I think that the ZDnet article makes more sense because when all the companies are failing, I'm sure the first thing (I *hope* the first thing) dot com employees get rid of is porn fees.

The increase was in album sales. Overall music sales are down because of a 40% drop in sales of singles. Look at the article here on MSNBC.

What is this "Naptser" thing you talk about?

It's a technique similar to the Pig Latin defense against Naptser sharing control. By spelling it that way, we prevent Naptser and the RAII from finding stories about this issue, and probably suing everyone involved for some DCMA violation to be worked out later.

--

In fact, spam costs Internet subscribers worldwide more than $9 billion dollars every year.

In our media driven society, I'm amazed that space.com didn't include any pictures of the Mir2 design. Of course, if RSC couldn't afford to make any computer renderings, this might limit the media material available.

Success! I just ran across the same article on MSNBC. However, this copy has a picture of Leonid Gorshkov with a projection of Mir 2 in the background.

In the picture, you see some elements that look like they are right out of Mir (1) and the Russian ISS modules. The biggest difference is a large truss holding the solar arrays which bears a strong resemblence to the truss which will be installed on ISS starting next year.

One thing on this truss that is not present on Mir or ISS is a couple of large dish antennas. I remember something like this being proposed for the old Freedom design (or one of it's revisions), but nothing like that is planned now. Also, I'm not sure if these are radar or communications.

Anyway, it looks like they could do a lot better by just supporting the ISS efforts. I wonder how much money they spent doing up these plans which could have gone towards construction of the modules they have already promised to ISS.

I thought that the joke is close to a disater/tragedy classic. Who the hell uses Mastercard anyway? I get so many offers for "pre-approved" credit cards it's silly. To all credit card marketeers out there: get a grip, I really don't need $4,000,000 dollars worth of credit cards. One is enough. The balance? Maybe $200. The limit? $10,000. That's enough to buy a few toys with, but I prefer to save. Think about it. I saw an article today about how our economy might be getting hurt by all the credit cards out there and the ways that people misuse them. Whatever happened to the day when a person saved up for something?



Dive Gear

Have ya looked at a map at all? Taiwan is far to the northeast of this. It has nothing to do with this. Might want to take your "silly little mind" and read up on this (here, even though it is liberal biased, check out MSNBC for some information.... check out the map at the bottom.(there are better ones out there... one of which shows the humorous claim of china to the Spratly island chain)

In other news today...

If you think you're gay,
you can rejoice today,
for Amsterdam made the day,
and is leading the way...

http://www.msnbc.com/news/552685.asp?0nm=T19Q

From http://www.msnbc.com/news/481970.asp#BODY:

AOL 6.0 still uses Internet Explorer as its Web browser.

No sign of which version, tho.

--

Now, I'm not just trying to say "The parents aren't watching the kids, so they watch bad TV and it makes a bad influence"; and I don't think you were either. I think that the role of parents (and teachers) is huge; but not nearly the whole of it. Why, pray tell, do we now work more, sleep less, and cut back on leisure time? Why do we, as the MSNBC article says, "live to work" rather than "work to live"?

I'm sure Katz would put the finger at Big Business, evil corporations, something like that. But greed, ambition, even big corporations (Standard Oil?) aren't new.

I think, that, really, the problem is in electronics; but more importantly, they're really changing the way we CAN live our lives. And we're further than ever from the way, genetically, we SHOULD be living our lives. Take for instance (an old example, but still), indoor lighting. With this amazing invention, we can now work, play, or whatever, nearly all night. Sure, we still need our 8 hours - but did ancient humans only sleep 8 hours? Almost certainly not; light was pretty hard to come by; you certainly didn't do your work (food gathering) at night, you didn't go places, nothing. And food gathering has changed too; we see obese people, people who don't exercise, because, well, we don't have to any more. Recently, the advent of easily accessible PCs has caused Carpal Tunnel - we weren't built to spend 8 hours a day typical. Technology taking care of the "need" to hunt, many males feel a need (I know I do; my shrink said it wasn't that rare) to engage in some kind of battle; part of the problem we are discussing. More importantly, though, new electronics, are replacing not just the physical things (after all, food, light, transport - these burdens were lifted from us decades ago), but social things.

It's becoming easier and easier to detach from the world. In fact, I'd be interested in seeing that "Sleep less, work more" article as applied by profession; probably the more wired the profession, the less sleep. Because, well, it seems like, as you become more wired, you spend less time physically engaged, especially with other people. This would make sense for the social problems kids face, also; they desire to detach and return to their "online" world, as I'd suspect many geeks can/wish to do. And there, they don't learn how to interact as people; at least with others outside of their group. Now, what does that have to do with working more? Well, if you're not the social type, you can very easily latch on to your work. It gives you something to do. Did you see what other activity they said had gone down? Sex... of course, a very physical, very social activity. Myself, as a very detached person, know how good being at work can feel - since you don't have to deal with people (depending on your job, of course; as a programmer, I don't have much, but as a salesman, you would obviously). Less time spent doing leisure activities means less social life. Plus, the more you can get the chance to detach from the world, the less you learn to "Deal with" people you don't like; you can "ignore", "block", or whatever them, which you can't do as much in a "normal" life. Most people who work with you are probably peers to you; you don't work with the boss that much. Parents can escape the kids by shipping them off to day care (which wasn't nearly the accepted option now that it was before). People can isolate themselves from things they hate, by being at work; minimal true social interaction. (You can have a social life at work, of course. But that's not your purpose for being there, and you can get out of it. After all, spending a night with friends is far more social than working late).

So, then, what do we do? Force people outside? No, of course not. It seems odd that technology, which should make life easier and happier, has made life worse for people. People who can do more in less time wind up spending more time at work and less time asleep. They aren't in tune with their physical bodies, but with their work. But trying to get people do things just doesn't work. Peoplpe we always shirk; that's part of ancestry, too. It's pointless to burn extra calories, in fact, the problem with that should be obvious (in a society where food is limited). Although many exercise programs tout increased energy (which is altogether believable), we won't enjoy doing it; since, burning calories for the sake of burning calories is something that, genetically, is a no-no. So what do we do? We've already begun to create alternate sources of interaction, thigns like video games, to fill the need. For instance, again, the role of the male hunter - let's be honest, there aren't that many female gamers. Socially, we can keep kids from coming into contact with people they dislike as much; creating more schools like mine, and for other focuses also. But ultimately, the only real solution is in genetic engineering. Our world has changed - for better or worse, nobody is going to rid the world of lights. We can do some things to adept mentally, but ultimately, I think, physical changes are the only way for us to continue peacably.

Here is an article that carries the daily diary of some hackers. It's a very very interesting read.

I read the article on both the MSNBC web site and the INSIDE.COM web site. The MSNBC version really sucks bad. The text appears to be there, but it was harder to read and very poorly layed out. Notice how it is formatted into a little narrow column on MSNBC while INSIDE.COM has it filling out the whole screen, even though they do have menus and ads along the sides. This does show the case that big corporations are really goofing up bad. And they are wondering why the net isn't turning huge profits for them?.

Slashdot needs to start making a better choice about which sites they give primary links to and start encouraging better web sites, instead of brown nosing big corporations that can only make screwed up web sites.

MSNBC has been doing this for a few months now. If you go to their site and click on any of the categories, you're often given a large (300x400, perhaps) graphic featuring some company's latest product, a new web site, or just another general advertisement. Therefore, interuption-based advertising on the Web isn't quite as new as many people think it might be. Here's an example of what I saw after clicking on "Technology" in the left-hand link menu.

The story includes a screen shot of the HTML editor. Looks like it has a built in validator, which is pretty neat.

Looks like Mir has the possibility of landing on a fishing fleet (man that would suck...)

Now if they would only look into unmanned solutions. This might become cost effective.

Dancin Santa

That MAY be true if the reason for finding and imaging planets were to find extreterrestrial life, but it's not. That would just be the cherry on the cake.

It is to get a better understanding of how our own planet came into existence, to learn more about how the universe is comprised, etc...you know, REAL science. Are you saying that finding other solar systems beyond our own isn't important?

Sedondly, to say that a magical mythical god created life, when science has proven that we evolved, would be a tragedy. To stop all learning because God and the bible provide all answers would be a blow to discovery, BIG TIME. The Bible is a Christian book, what about all the other religions? Religion is required by the fact that every human being longs for the answers to questions of, "Where did we come from?", "Where are we going?", and "Why am I here?". Religion (whichever one you have been TOLD to choose by your social surroundings) answers all these questions nicely, and for that purpose.

What would happen if we suddenly were to realize, that we are NOT alone in this vast universe. A universe that is so vast, that most humans can't comprehend the size and distances involved. What would happen to your religious beliefs? To find out that we are not only NOT alone, but that we are relatively young in the universal intelligence pool. What then?

We live an a non-descript planet in the middle of a non-descript solar system in the middle of billions of stars that make up our Milky Way galaxy, one of billions of galaxies...and you're going to tell me that we are it?!?! Shame on you for your egocentric ideals. To project the hint that you KNOW that we are alone. Are you the ALMIGHTY god?! I think not, and no, you DONT know if we are alone, you couldn't possibly know, so why do you say these things??? We are finding the building blocks of life in deep "empty" space! So to say, that in trillions of tries, where live giving particles are found in all areas of space, just happened to evolve on OUR planet for no apparent reason (sarcastic), would be silly. To say that in the 20 billions years (our guess as of today as to the age of our universe) that our universe has been evolving, that Earth was the only place that life arose would also be rather simple minded. By the numbers alone, as stated by the Drake equation, to say that we are alone goes against the odds.

Lastly, just because Mr. Alien hasn't walked up to your door and introduced himself/herself (PC) to you, DOES NOT constitute proof that we are not being visited on a very regular basis, now is it. To say that we will never be able to travel faster than the speed of light is also extremely narrow minded. We (well, other scientists actually) are now sending light at 3 times 186,000 miles a second, not to mention, we have STOPPED light, and then sent it on its way. To say that manipulating gravity wouldn't bypass the speed of light conundrum is also wrong. To warp gravity is to also warp time and space. We can concievably travel vast distances in a relative instant, all within the realm of reality, TODAY.

Anyway, my rant is over. I just was blown away by narrow mindedness of some of the responses here. To know that we know LITTLE of the universe we live in seems to be forgotten. To assume (yes, makes an ass out of u and me) that we are it, and that discovery is BORING, is, well, illogical. Thank you for your time...Bartles and James

That MAY be true if the reason for finding and imaging planets were to find extreterrestrial life, but it's not. That would just be the cherry on the cake. It is to get a better understanding of how our own planet came into existence, to learn more about how the universe is comprised, etc...you know, REAL science. Are you saying that finding other solar systems beyond our own isn't important? Sedondly, to say that a magical mythical god created life, when science has proven that we evolved, would be a tragedy. To stop all learning because God and the bible provide all answers would be a blow to discovery, BIG TIME. The Bible is a Christian book, what about all the other religions? Religion is required by the fact that every human being longs for the answers to questions of, "Where did we come from?", "Where are we going?", and "Why am I here?". Religion (whichever one you have been TOLD to choose by your social surroundings) answers all these questions nicely, and for that purpose. What would happen if we suddenly were to realize, that we are NOT alone in this vast universe. A universe that is so vast, that most humans can't comprehend the size and distances involved. What would happen to your religious beliefs? To find out that we are not only NOT alone, but that we are relatively young in the universal intelligence pool. What then? We live an a non-descript planet in the middle of a non-descript solar system in the middle of billions of stars that make up our Milky Way galaxy, one of billions of galaxies...and you're going to tell me that we are it?!?! Shame on you for your egocentric ideals. To project the hint that you KNOW that we are alone. Are you the ALMIGHTY god?! I think not, and no, you DONT know if we are alone, you couldn't possibly know, so why do you say these things??? We are finding the building blocks of life in deep "empty" space! So to say, that in trillions of tries, where live giving particles are found in all areas of space, just happened to evolve on OUR planet for no apparent reason (sarcastic), would be silly. To say that in the 20 billions years (our guess as of today as to the age of our universe) that our universe has been evolving, that Earth was the only place that life arose would also be rather simple minded. By the numbers alone, as stated by the Drake equation, to say that we are alone goes against the odds. Lastly, just because Mr. Alien hasn't walked up to your door and introduced himself/herself (PC) to you, DOES NOT constitute proof that we are not being visited on a very regular basis, now is it. To say that we will never be able to travel faster than the speed of light is also extremely narrow minded. We (well, other scientists actually) are now sending light at 3 times 186,000 miles a second, not to mention, we have STOPPED light, and then sent it on its way. To say that manipulating gravity wouldn't bypass the speed of light conundrum is also wrong. To warp gravity is to also warp time and space. We can concievably travel vast distances in a relative instant, all within the realm of reality, TODAY. Anyway, my rant is over. I just was blown away by narrow mindedness of some of the responses here. To know that we know LITTLE of the universe we live in seems to be forgotten. To assume (yes, makes an ass out of u and me) that we are it, and that discovery is BORING, is, well, illogical. Thank you for your time...Bartles and James

E-mail encryption use is low despite potential for snooping. Here is Kehoe who has tried to persuade friends to install the free software, too, but they couldn't be bothered.

If this means that some crappy sites don't survive, too bad!

But wait ... the real news today is John Ritter's ballsac.

That's right -- no kidding -- see the story on MSNBC news: about how in an old episode of Three's Company, John Ritter's scrotum popped out of his pants.

My question is this: which is more dangerous? Napster trafficking in copyrighted materials or a flash of ritter's ballsack popping (and broadcast, I might add, on Nickolodean)?

As a parent, I think it's most definitely the latter. Screw the RIAA. I want the MPAA -- or the TV guys -- to bear down on 'Three's Company' and *rate it properly.* If one day I sit down with my future TIVO with the VCHIP I want to know that my young son (or daughter) can't see ritter's sac flop out from between the fly flap in a pair of loose-fitting skivvies!

This is such a fucked up world.

God. MS-NBC is a freaking propaganda machine, not a news source.. look at this article on XP. "Goodbye Mac snobs" ?? The article has less tact and maturity than most trolls on here..

Just did my part. BTW:

CNN.com for us lazy bastards who dont like to type ( =
FoxNews (mailto)
MSNBC.com World News (mailto)
MSNBC.com Technology News (mailto)
USA Today Technology Feedback

Just to name a few

Just did my part. BTW:

CNN.com for us lazy bastards who dont like to type ( =
FoxNews (mailto)
MSNBC.com World News (mailto)
MSNBC.com Technology News (mailto)
USA Today Technology Feedback

Just to name a few

MSNBC has this article on said topic. It includes a list of who the player's are here. The list includes everbody's favorites: AOL Time Warner, Yahoo!, MSN, Walt Disney Internet Group and DoubleClick. Now I will just have to make some additions to my Junkbusters proxy.

Another article, same subject