Slashdot Mirror

But then Apple also does not make a phone either http://texyt.com/iphone+manufacturer+supplier+assembler+not+apple+00113. So what's your point, other than market leaders change really rapidly in consumer products, so winner now but dead in five years time. Apple is managing to do a pretty good job of mucking up it's brand at the moment, si yeah likely is in five years time, things will be the way they were five years ago.

Sony, who is known to pay millions towards Rockstar (with GTA series) and other developers to make PlayStation exclusives ....

I'm pretty sure it's the other way around.

Maybe if you donate a laptop, the kids getting the XOs will figure out how to cluster them and model more than just a malaria cure.

And perhaps the person who would have discovered how to stop malaria for good dies of malaria, due to lack of medicines now.

Huh? What? Where did anyone suggest diverting medicine dollars to make OLPCs? I've never heard of such a thing.

Speculation like this doesn't do much good. I can only make a decision for myself, but I prefer to make a donation to a cause where there is a measurable benefit, and not a for profit scheme that hasn't been able to show any benefits for the recipients so far, except burdening them with support expenses they can ill afford.

Hmmm, I haven't incurred any support expenses on my kids OLPC. My 11-year-old bricked his but he used his sister's and an old camera memory card to fix it himself.

All that being said, you should spend your money on the things you want to accomplish, and nobody else has any right to dictate those things to you. Good for you, for caring about where your donations go!

Maybe if you donate a laptop, the kids getting the XOs will figure out how to cluster them and model more than just a malaria cure.

And perhaps the person who would have discovered how to stop malaria for good dies of malaria, due to lack of medicines now.

Speculation like this doesn't do much good. I can only make a decision for myself, but I prefer to make a donation to a cause where there is a measurable benefit, and not a for profit scheme that hasn't been able to show any benefits for the recipients so far, except burdening them with support expenses they can ill afford.

http://texyt.com/Norton+Anti-virus+disables+thousands+of+PCs+in+China+00089

Symantec's compensation offer was... interesting

http://texyt.com/symantec+china+compensates+antivirus+victims+angry+reaction+00112

http://texyt.com/Norton+Anti-virus+disables+thousands+of+PCs+in+China+00089

Symantec's compensation offer was... interesting

http://texyt.com/symantec+china+compensates+antivirus+victims+angry+reaction+00112

No, Digg did MUCH MORE than simply try to comply with a DMCA takedown notice.

They censored all discussion critical of their actions. They banned users critical of them, even those who never posted the number. They deleted all commentary that pointed out their previous sponsorship by the AACS-LA, and banned anyone attempting to bring this to light.

Their apology pretended like they had never deleted or banned anyone for simple dissent, or even banned anyone, only just deleted the magic number. Even after the apology, they continued to suppress stories calling attention to their censorship of pure, non-infringing dissent speech and mention of their financial relationship with the AACS-LA.

THAT is what much of the Digg revolt was about. It's a LOT more than just the number. Here are a couple good articles with the real truth. The Digg folks would like nothing more than for everyone to believe this was ONLY about a 16 byte number. Please read these and next time you see this mistruth, you'll know better.

Digg fights user revolt over HD-DVD ban - Digg founders took HD-DVD sponsorship.

Digg still isn't telling the whole truth about its HD-DVD sponsorship

No, Digg did MUCH MORE than simply try to comply with a DMCA takedown notice.

They censored all discussion critical of their actions. They banned users critical of them, even those who never posted the number. They deleted all commentary that pointed out their previous sponsorship by the AACS-LA, and banned anyone attempting to bring this to light.

Their apology pretended like they had never deleted or banned anyone for simple dissent, or even banned anyone, only just deleted the magic number. Even after the apology, they continued to suppress stories calling attention to their censorship of pure, non-infringing dissent speech and mention of their financial relationship with the AACS-LA.

THAT is what much of the Digg revolt was about. It's a LOT more than just the number. Here are a couple good articles with the real truth. The Digg folks would like nothing more than for everyone to believe this was ONLY about a 16 byte number. Please read these and next time you see this mistruth, you'll know better.

Digg fights user revolt over HD-DVD ban - Digg founders took HD-DVD sponsorship.

Digg still isn't telling the whole truth about its HD-DVD sponsorship

"A printer in which I don't get a print in less than a few minutes isn't very useful to me."

Did you RTFA? This is the technology we read on /. oh so long ago:
"new Memjet technology can print 60 full-color pages per minute. Instead of having a print head that moves side to side like current inkjets, the print head spans the full width of the page."

From TFA:
"Edgeline uses a page-wide stationary print-head, decreasing wear and tear by removing contact with the paper."

Here's an amazing (unbelievable?) video of the Memjet printer in action
I've been waiting for this ever since I heard of it: All the photographic quality of a inkjet with faster speeds than laser printers and saving ink to boot. Very disappointed we won't see it at home now, but it's only a matter of time before it filters down.

This seems to be somewhat related to the new Memjet technology that was just released a few weeks ago. See http://www.texyt.com/silverbrook+memjet+technology +available+desktop+photo+wideformat+hp+edgeline+co mparison or http://www.memjet.com/