Slashdot Mirror

When are you gonna start using your head? Work smarter, not harder!!! :)

You're in Michigan aren't you?

I'm not really sure this supports the point that Napster is OK.

The first three articles are these:
Grateful Dead ungrateful for song piracy
Grateful Dead takes no-nonsense approach to digital piracy
Pirating, Like the Doo-Dah Man

A sampling of other stories brings up discussions on O'Reilly and other places with some claims that the Dead encouraged bootlegging, but with the AP story saying "The band has never authorized bootlegged copies of its studio recordings." And again:

Under the April 1999 policy, though, the Dead declared that "no commercial gain may be sought by websites offering digital files of our music, whether through advertising, exploiting databases compiled from their traffic, or any other means."

That clearly rules out Napster, as (AFAIR) it was advertising-funded.

Besides, if it's a public place, there should be a public phone nearby. It's not like these people are on a highway in the middle of nowhere.

Not exactly. If you know anything about cellphones, you know they're pretty mcuh killing the (need for a) payphone market. More examples...

This actually reminds me of the question of why cellphones are banned on airplanes. Yes, I know the tower range is slim to none, but it can work (and I believe it's been discussed before) ..

-'f

What on earth has this to do with Echelon? It is a problem that comes with any situation where someone needs to have someone watching over someone else, i.e most governmental activity.

Rather, the problem is of course that admitting the existence of Echelon is the same as legitimizing it, which for obvious reasons isn't the best idea in the world. It would probably be helpful for those European guys trying to figure out what the hell is going on though...

I'm all for new interesting things and change if it will help us. However, I just don't see how coloring the money helps-- as the press release states, it seems that $45 million in counterfeit money entered circulation in 2001. How much did the US companies spend on retrofitting their vending machines? According to this article pointed out by another reader, $350 million! It doesn't seem like a good idea to me...

Congress has already approved the changes. The changes relate to a bill that passed several years ago when the Treasury department wanted to change the faces, add color changing ink, watermarks, etc. to our "new" bills. The legislature that was passed used very open language that allows the Treasury department to modify the look of US money in an attempt to foil counterfieters. However, the changes to money must be consistant with that goal. For example, we can't just start putting out quarters with holes in them just because its "exotic".

In an article on the front page of the USA Today, "...each denomination will feature a combination of 'subtle' [exact word from Treasury representatives] colors in areas that are now neutral." The first bill to be updated? The venerable $20, with $50s and $100s to follow no more than a year and a half later.

The other interesting thing that the USA Today article points out: "Companies spent $350 million to retrofit [vending] machines in the last change in 1996, according to the National Automatic Merchandising Association. Metro, Washington D.C.'s subway system, spent $2.5 million to retrofit it's fare card machines six years ago." I remember that. It totally sucked to ride the Metro for about 6 months unless you had an old style $20. Maybe this time it'll go a bit smoother since companies had to do it in recent memory.

-Runz

OK, let's go through the procedure that protects us from the valid concern in your last paragraph, and then we'll look at sources. Were this simply a case of `anyone declared an enemy of the state can be turned over to the military', you would be quite right to object, but that is not the case.

Long standing precedent, going back to before the war of 1812, and with corresponding cases in the Civil War and the Second World War makes clear that military law is the proper jurisdiction for trying cases of an individual entering the US in the service of a hostile power in order to commit acts of law. As cited above, Ex Parte Quirin upholds the established precedent that such cases are a matter for military justice even if the suspect is a US citizen, but also leaves room for civilian court appeals of the decision that a case falls in this category.

Mr. al-Muhajir, ne Padilla, is filing just such an appeal right now.here in New York. If the court rules that there is not valid evidence to classify him as an enemy combatant, he will be remanded to a civilian court. At that point, the DOJ can either seek to bring other charges, or release him.

So this is not something which can happen lightly. In addition to the direct order from the president which is needed to classify a suspect as an enemy combatant, the whole process is subject to judicial review in the normal federal courts.

Now, on to sources. Here are some more articles on the matter:

• this piece from Newsday
• suggests that Mr. al-Muhajir was held on a material witness warrant before being charged.
• this piece from the Baltimore Sun discusses some of the precedents in the case, and what the government's options are, as does this piece from National Review.
• this piece from USA Today has some more discussion of the case.

Besides that, I consider the enslavement of intelligent beings to be immoral. Besides, we'll probably still end up with Fondly Fahrenheit. o/~ All reet, all reet, be cool and discreet, baby! o/~

• Probably not, because Slashdot is generally more about tech stuff than general political stuff. Also, the slashdot community seems to tend to think that anyone getting into space is cool. However, such a statement/link combo would definitely be VALID COMMENTARY if 1) it were attached to an article about something China was doing that they shouldn't be doing and 2) Either Bill Clinton or Al Gore were currently president or likely to be president anytime in the very immediate future. As the latter is not the case, a link to a negative clinton story probably would not make sense. Anyway, it probably would not OCCUR to a slashdot poster (though it may be more likely such a thing would happen on kuro5hin) to make such a connection on a China story, but it might, there's no reason why it wouldn't, and i do not think anyone would mind.
• George W. Bush is not exactly anti-china, and seems to be doing the same lets-ignore-human-rights-abuses-and-trade-with-chi na thing as everyone else since richard nixon. Speaking of which, that's an interesting point: the opening of relations with Communist China was begun by Nixon and expanded by Raegan, which between the two of them are probably the most conservative presidents of the last 50 years. There are many things to fault Clinton for, but his soft stance on China is not particularly one of them, as he was not much worse about this than previous/current presidents. (Although i will say, if Gore participates in the 2004 elections, you may critisize him for his support of China all that you like.)
• The Bush Administration is very very open about their pro-business, anti-antitrust-enforcement stance. As Bush has many personal contacts in the business world, it is-- while cynical-- not altogether unreasonable to suggest this philosophy stems less from knowledge of economics and theories of promoting public good than it does from how Bush and Bush's friends would benefit from the application of this philosophy. Moreover, you absolutely cannot deny this: while Clinton was in office, a full-blown effort to have Microsoft taken down as a monopoly was going on. During the 2000 political elections, Microsoft donated significantly more money and lobbying effort to Bush than Gore. (Also, one can make a significant case that Ashcroft is too biased to be allowed near the Microsoft case.) Once Bush was in office, this effort virtually ceased, and the people who were running the antitrust suit were removed and replaced with people whose goal at this point seems to let off Microsoft with the most minimal punishing possible. Before Bush entered office, the antitrust suit was characterized by the DOJ and the computing industry on one side fighting to have competition returned to the industry, and Microsoft on the other fighting to have things stay as they are; now it is characterized by the computing industry on one side fighting to have competition returned to the industry, and the DOJ and Microsoft on the other side fighting to have things stay as they are. Thus, i would say it is valid commentary that, whether the "bought" implications are valid, to say that GWB can be made to let antitrust violators off the hook.

Is this a cost cutting exercise? Noticed this on the hotel news rag this morning:

http://www.usatoday.com/life/enter/movies/2002/200 2-06-18-lilo.htm

How about Boston Globe or USA Today? Maybe San Jose Mercury News? Or heck, even MSNBC a site co-owned by NBS and Microsoft?

Also, Washington Post ran their own story over the weekend.

So, yeah, looks like the AP does go out to lots of places besides CNN, huh?

Well, obviously they don't get millions of new users per month. Probably it's in the thousands.

Probably the main reason Opera has become popular recently is a couple of high profile news articles, e.g. USA Today, Time.com, and most especially the notorious MSN incident last fall when Opera accused Microsoft of locking their browser out of MSN, a fight which received international attention and greatly boosted general interest in Opera.

The browser was always aimed at mainstream users (what other kind are there?) but it's appealed to a kind of power user because of its many extra features such as keyboard shortcuts and tabbed browsing. These are not power features per se, just that sophisticated users tend to be early adopters of innovative products.

Some articles with more information:

A piece from NewsDay, which among other details, confirms that Mr. al-Muhajir had legal representation in New York, and adds that a legal hearing is being held today to confirm his status. This article also suggests that Mr. Muhajir was initially detained on a material witness warrant.

A piece from the Baltimore Sun suggests that the government is rethinking use of military law in this case, and discusses some of the precedents in either direction.

A piece from USA Today suggests that al-Muhajir's lawyers are almost certainly proceeding with a habeaa corpus petition, and points out that regardless of venue, no one is suggesting that he does not have a right to do so. It is also pointed out that the primary ramification of a ruling that Mr. Muhajir is an enemy combatant would not be a new venue of trial per se, but permission to hold him until the end of hostilities.

I'm still looking for more definitive word on the legal maneuvers already pursued and still open in the case. None of this is new precedent -- as mentioned earlier in this thread, many of the details were hashed out during the Second World War, when a group of German spies, including a handful of US citizens was infiltrated from submarine into the continental US with plans to wreak havoc by bombing Jewish-owned stores and other civilian targets.

Almost like when MicroSoft got hacked... except of course in the instance of closed sourced software, only your vendor can audit the code for trojans and backdoors. Kind of similiar???

Or maybe it is more like the time Microsoft placed a virus on their corporate update website???

Guess you don't have a point... is Bill paying you for this?

USA Today's cover story from Wednesday was a very well-written and non-biased article about everything that is wrong with the music industry. I'm surprised at the quality of the piece; given that it was ran in the king of the fluff rags sold on the newsstand these days.

View it here.

Don't laugh at me... this USA Today article was the first google that wasn't propaganda: Music-copying laws often shield consumers.

It basically says this point is untried and unclear. It does say "the 1992 Audio Home Recording Act shelters consumers from being sued over music they copy at home for their use. Furthermore -- and this is where the law gets ambiguous -- the act also may protect consumers from being sued over music they copy for their friends, legal experts say."

Of course, I wouldn't pay USA Today $500/hour to represent me in court :).

These claims are circumstantial, arising primarily from the slew of pro-MS memos among their publications, and the testimony ADTI submitted on Microsoft's behalf at the Dept. of Justice trial. To quote another source:

I have not found a specific link between Microsoft and ADTI... but Microsoft is known to be funding similar conservative organizations. See:

http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/tech/cti306.htm
http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/tech/cth989.htm
http://www.prospect.org/print/V11/16/marshall-j.ht ml http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/ms_tuncom/public/29 / tc-00028697.htm

These claims are circumstantial, arising primarily from the slew of pro-MS memos among their publications, and the testimony ADTI submitted on Microsoft's behalf at the Dept. of Justice trial. To quote another source:

I have not found a specific link between Microsoft and ADTI... but Microsoft is known to be funding similar conservative organizations. See:

http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/tech/cti306.htm
http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/tech/cth989.htm
http://www.prospect.org/print/V11/16/marshall-j.ht ml http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/ms_tuncom/public/29 / tc-00028697.htm

And I would add that there are very good reasons Kyoto was rejected. Have you noticed that almost no one else ratified it either? (Yes, the EU did, but this means nothing without the member states signing on, and none of them have done so or even expressed an intention to do so).

You are not up to date. The 15 countries of the EU just ratified the Kyoto Protocol a few days ago.

I can agree to disagree and coexist with environmentalists as long as they don't cost me money or restrict my freedoms. :)

That said, I was trying to make it a question of science, not a question of belief...

There are certainly scientists, particularly in recent years, that are coming out with studies that show that humans are not the cause of global warming and/or that global warming isn't taking place. However, I believe the majority of scientists support the evidence that humans are causing global warming and that it does exist.

That's where I guess we do disagree, and I'm not sure either of us have data to directly support our position.

I would agree that the the scientists that believe in human-induced global warming are getting more airtime on the news. I would agree that we see more "pro-global warming" reports on the news. I would agree that the IPCC *says* there's a consensus and that's what the news reports. I wouldn't agree, however, that any of this suggests that more scientists do truly believe in any significant human-induced global warming.

Global warming is a "pop culture topic" that also has a doomsday tendency so the news loves to report it. The IPCC wants global warming to be true to forward their agenda so they use the inacurate surface record and carefully use words that imply that there's a consensus without really saying there is (read the IPCC document carefully... There's "wiggle room").

I've seen polls of scientists where those that outright BELIEVE in human-induced global warming is about 30%. There's another 50% or so that believe "it may be true, but it hasn't been proven conclusively and more research is needed" and another 20% that doesn't believe it. Forgive me, I don't have the link handy--I saw that about a year ago.

The point is, I'm not at all sure that most scientists believe in human-induced global warming just because the IPCC says so and because we hear a lot about it on the news.

The study you provided is just one of many and again, I think you can find many more indicating the opposite conclusion than the one you have linked to. 23 years seems like an awfully small timeframe to be looking at, as well.

Yes, you can find many others indicating the opposite, but they invariably use a potentially VERY flawed surface record.

Yes, the surface record spans 150 years and the satellite record only spans 23. But in those 23 years we are seeing global cooling whereas the surface record for those 23 years supposedly indicates further global warming. If the 23 years of GOOD data shows that the last 23 years of surface record data is broken, what confidence do we have in the accuracy of the other 127 years of surface record data?

I'd rather base my conclusions on 23 year of good, accurate data than 150 years of data of questionable accuracy. But that's just me, I guess.

As a counterpoint though to your study, I read a different study that determined that global warming would actually cause an ice age due to disruptions in the tidal currents/jet streams. This would be in line with the study your provided.

That's interesting, I hadn't seen that one yet. Kind of ironic that global warming could cause global cooling. :)

there have been released vast amounts of 'greenhouse gases'. I am concerned that the earth/nature does not have the capability to adapt in that (relatively) quick amount of time to such a radically different environment.

You do realize, of course, that the #1 greenhouse gas is not CO2, but water vapor (clouds)?

Water is MUCH more efficient at trapping heat than CO2, and even with all the CO2 we've pumped into the air over the last century, H2O accounts for up to 4% of the atmosphere by volume (depending on humidity). Meanwhile, CO2 currently accounts for only 0.0366% of the atmosphere (Source: USA Today ).

I understand your concern, it may seem like a lot of CO2 has been produced. But there's still about 109 times as much H2O in the air as there is CO2, and H2O is more efficient at blocking heat. I just don't think the amount of CO2 is critical when compared to the vast amonut of H2O...

I find this all the more likely and I guess I would rather be safe than sorry.

I agree we should look for alternative energy sources. I just don't believe it is in anyone's best interest to arbitrarily cut CO2 emissions "just in case." The data suggests it's not causing any harm, but the harm to the world in forcing CO2 reductions before we have an alternative could be devestating--and I'm not just talking about oil barons losing their money. When the economy breaks down it's not just the rich that get poorer, the poor get poorer, and there is more suffering.

I'd rather figure out whether it's necessary before subjecting the world to that... The medicine could be worse than the supposed disease!

Recently on Slashdot there was an article complaining about the increasing costs of broadband yet the fact of the matter is that a large number of large telecoms are going out of business because they spent too much, too fast and make too little to keep up with their debts.

Global Crossing, PSINet, and STAR all bankrupt while WorldCom, in trouble and Qwest taking a several hundred million dollar loss it looks like the number of telecommunications companies is shrinking fast and it is unclear what will happen to their networks.

Not to be a contrarian, but this just goes to show that things aren't really black and white when it comes to the cost of broadband and in fact we may be getting it cheaply considering how much was spent building the networks.

Recently on Slashdot there was an article complaining about the increasing costs of broadband yet the fact of the matter is that a large number of large telecoms are going out of business because they spent too much, too fast and make too little to keep up with their debts.

Global Crossing, PSINet, and STAR all bankrupt while WorldCom, in trouble and Qwest taking a several hundred million dollar loss it looks like the number of telecommunications companies is shrinking fast and it is unclear what will happen to their networks.

Not to be a contrarian, but this just goes to show that things aren't really black and white when it comes to the cost of broadband and in fact we may be getting it cheaply considering how much was spent building the networks.

Yeah, it's apparent that the Bells are doing wonderful!

Verizon cuts

SBC cuts

BellSouth cuts

I'm sorry you feel my comments have hit a bit too close to home for comfort

You're apologizing for something that I never said or expressed.

- in my experience it's a sign you're not very bright if a logical, reasoned response to your points strikes you as nasty. The truth often is.

This is nasty, don't you think?

Once again you misinterpret me so as to have something you can mount a sensible argument against.

If you feel that I am misinterpreting your statements, then by all means, please point out how. I am not interested in having an argument just for the sake of arguing.

Speaking of backing off, my experience was that the keyboard manufacturer was not nearly as circumspect about the chance of improvement with their product as you now appear to be. Hence my warning - don't deal with the keyboard manufacturers. Deal with a doctor.

I don't fully trust keyboard manufacturers either. Clearly, they have an interest in making their product sound better than it really is. And though your statement makes it sound as though I'm somehow changing my mind, this is not the case. I never did say that I fully trust them.

Of course, when I say keyboard manufacturers, I'm talking about companies like Datahand (as I mentioned in my original post), and you are talking about the Microsoft Natural keyboard - perhaps the difference is too subtle for you. But pressing on...

Actually, I'm familiar with the Datahand. I considered picking one up, but went with a Kinesis keyboard instead. I've actually never mentioned the Microsoft Natural.

So you've read a bit on the issue outside the product brochures, eh? You didn't cite any sources, but let's speak hypothetically for a moment; so, keyboards don't help people who've developed a problem... they're a preventative measure, according to "your reading." Funny; that's not what one might take away from your original post.

I don't believe you are speaking about any post that I have made. Can you point out where you feel I said something along the lines of: An ergonomic keyboard will cure serious RSI.

But do you want to tell the crowd how people know if it's too late for a keyboard to help them? Or perhaps you'd rather leave that too... a qualified physician?

Well, because I personally believe that using ergonomic keyboards simply makes sense for anyone that does a considerable amount of typing, I would recommend them to anyone at any time just like I would recommend an ergonomic chair, etc.

I also appreciate your feigned ignorance about my point - very amusing. Here, let me spell it out for you, since it's no fair if you're too baffled to follow along, right?

More unnecessary nastiness.

I see you made up an anecdote meant to illustrate that the doctor is only treating the symptoms...

You didn't make it clear if you were referring to the previous trials with my doctors or yours. Ok, you mean yours. You state:

... and I was given two cortisone injections, an exercise regimen, and a piece of advice:

"Those keyboards aren't worth the plastic they're molded out of."

I went back on the regular keyboard, and within weeks, I was 100% back to normal.

No where did you state that you changed anything about the way you type. Since that was the subject matter, it was reasonable to assume that you in fact did not change anything about the way you type. Later you state that you did in fact make many changes. This is good to hear. You should share with us more about what changes you (or your doctor) thought were useful.

Where was I? Ah yes. You're accusing me of "backing off from my original statement." Right. This may save you some trouble. No matter how much you hammer away at this, it won't change the fact that all I've done is relay the advice of my (very good) physician.

You're not being consistent. You state:

So, in summary:

• THE "ERGONOMIC," "RSI" KEYBOARDS ARE WORTHLESS

The standard QWERTY keyboards in use today are still a mess, and could still be improved. And improving them might even help prevent RSI. But my understanding of it, gleaned from the Doctors I've worked with is that the keyboard itself is a relatively small part of the puzzle...

Which is it? Do your doctors feel that ergonomic keyboards are "worthless"? Or do they feel that they are a "part of the puzzle"?

What was your complaint about that again? Oh yes. That doctors are greedy liars who want you to stay sick so they can keep treating you. Or, perhaps it was that doctors don't know what they're doing and can't help you.

I think doctors are people. Some people are caring and some are not. Some people are smart and knowledgeable, and some are not. The bottom line is that you are naive if you believe that all doctors know everything and only want to help you. Just like one would be naive to believe that all keyboard manufacturers know how to make the perfect keyboard that cures serious RSI.

Here's some reading you might find interesting. There are probably better articles out there, but I found this one on google in under 3 seconds:

http://www.usatoday.com/life/health/surgery/lhsur0 20.htm

The advice that you espouse in your original post was to seek professional help and basically do whatever they say. In fact you state:

GET A DOCTOR. DON'T DO ANYTHING TO DIAGNOSE, OR TREAT, YOUR CONDITION THAT SHE DOESN'T TELL YOU TO DO.

My advice is simply to not blindly believe everything that a doctor tells you. Sure, go to one. Listen carefully to what they tell you. But also do your own research, because doctors are just people, and people are not perfect.

I believe that perhaps one of the things that concerns you is the time-critical nature of serious RSI. I should make it clear to you that if I did had serious RSI, I think I would tend to default to the judgment of a doctor too in an effort to achieve the best immediate solution. This is the cost of having a problem that requires an immediate solution. But the best immediate solution is not always the best long-term solution. And I don't believe that ergonomic keyboards are a worthless piece to the long-term solution puzzle.

Ok. Anything else to add?

Unnecessary Dave.

yerricde wrote:

1. Longer albums. Back in the day, when vinyl was king, 35 minutes was considered an album; nowadays, CD albums average 70 minutes.

Double albums were quite common (at least among the artists I listen to, and many artists would put extra tracks on their cassette releases because they wanted to get the music out and it wouldn't fit on the vinyl.

Yes, CD albums are probably longer on average than Vinyl albums were (Vinyl you could get about 18 minutes per side / 36 total before having to make sound quality compromises), but I question your "70 minutes" figure for the average CD albums. The longest many CD players can handle is 74 minutes, and most albums are far from full. My guess is the average new music CD is about 45 minutes (not counting compilation or "Best of" CD's, where it's trivial to just add tracks until it's full).

2. Inflation. CDs cost USD 17 now, but $17 in AD2002 dollars is worth about $9 in AD1983 dollars (when CDs were first released).

According to the CPI, $17 in 2001 money (USD) is $9.65 in 1983 dollars. I don't think there are formal figures for 2002 yet, but your figure sounds plausible.

The thing is, how many people were buying CD's in 1983? CD sales didn't pass Vinyl sales until 1988 ($11.36). CD's didn't become the dominant form of music sales until they passed the cassette in 1992, and $17 in 2001 was $13.61 then (in terms of sales, cassettes were king from 1983 to 1992). As I recall, CDs themselves often sold for $9.95 in 1992 (because they were still competing with cassettes). We're talking about much more than just inflation here.

I don't have figures onhand, but my understanding is that CD production costs have dropped to the point where they are considerably cheaper to produce than cassettes (and have been for a while), yet the cassette version is sold for less than the CD of the same album. We're definately talking about much more than inflation here, and more than "longer albums".

Not when it's OUR brand of violence!
(which is now considered ART, BTW)

I wonder how many parents will complain about these games...
I mean killing drug dealers is ok by parents,
and killing terrorists is even better.

But if you were to say, kill a cop,
or fly a plane near a building...that's a whole different story!

Something tells me parents will not "Boo!" when these games start coming free
in cereal boxes and their kids start collecting military trading cards and wearing camo to school...

I wonder what the rating will be...
"Mom? When do you think I can get some trigger time with some real warm bodies?
Not 'till you're 18, son!"

Companies squander billions on tech

Frankly, this article is scary. Because even if the regular economy recovers, I think the tech sector will seriously lag behind. Of course, right now I have a job, but if I lose it I'll have a lot to worry about.

Eventually this will turn around, because a few companies will be willing to make smart investments in tech while a lot of others will be extremely stingy in that regard. Those companies will make money and leave their competitors behind. This may take years though.

Hmm, how can I make money from this since I know it is true?

Call Eric Harrison at the Multnomah Educational Service District in Portland, Ore. Since 1997, Harrison has been developing networks based on the free Linux operating system. His latest project links 40 older PCs to a single set of software applications running on a central Linux server computer. The cost: $200 a seat vs. $1,500 a seat for PCs running Microsoft, he says.

For example, the WAP address wap.sex.com can be viewed on cell phones using Verizon Wireless, Nextel Communications and Sprint PCS wireless Internet services. But the same URL entered into a Cingular Wireless device returns the message "your client is not allowed to access the requested object."

Now compare this old business-week article

But in France, Germany, and most of the rest of the Continent, the pickings are still slim. One trouble is that many phone companies are still in the beginning phases of WAP, and they block access to other service providers. This is known in the industry lingo as a ''closed garden.'' And for the time being, that garden has high fences. When I go to Germany with my French Web phone, I can only gain access to the Web through an international call to France, where I get a French weather report. This will change in the next year or two as phone companies adapt their Web services for roaming travelers.

And this USA today article:

Moreover, the speed hike only seemed to make a marginal difference over other wireless Web phones I've tried; I was still viewing text, and you must punch too many menu keys to access particular screens. And whenever I entered the Web address for usatoday.com, I received the following message: "WAP Gateway: Your client is not allowed to access the requested object."

What may have happened is that the sources tried to get to porn sites, didn't work, and then concluded that those sites were being banned in specific. But it could be a general compatibility problem affecting many sites.

Sig: What Happened To The Censorware Project (censorware.org)

• Microsoft, States Debate Remedies (eWeek, March 18)
• Microsoft Back in Court (internet.com, March 18)
• States ask for broad sanctions on Microsoft (USA Today, March 18)
• Microsoft 'killed Dell Linux' - States (Register, March 19)
• Microsoft pressured Dell to drop Linux (The Inquirer, March 19)
• Microsoft caught in the anti-Linux act (vnunet.com, March 19)

• Case Filings
• District Court Opinions

So the point still stands. IBM is not a software company in the same sense that Microsoft and Blizzard are software companies. IBM is a "solution provider" (yes, I know some people from IBM.) The bottom line is that they sell big iron to big organizations. Service comes as part of the package... at least theoretically. IBM would probably be just as well off without their software divisions, or even better.

Services and software are not the same thing. Get it? I know the party line is to hate the software companies, but I actually pity them. What tangible assets do the smaller ones have to fall back on in the current economic climate?

In a nutshell, the FTC is likely to bar Rambus from collecting royalties on SDRAM and may go so far as to bar royalties on DDR.

WHOOMP!! There it is!

Maybe contact the FTC on this matter, couldn't hurt, it's only a toll free call and some elevator music, but bad patents seem to be getting their attention at last.

If it stayed still for a while, would it engulf something? maybe make the world disappear.

Something similar was published in april in tne New York Times, the article is now archived, but here's some info.

Best RadioActive Waste Warning Sign for 10,000 years from now:

That dude from Robocop who fell into the waste.
Funny Girl!
The Hawk-man
Barney Frank
CowboyNeal

I think the best best-seller list is at the USA Today. Instead of only tracking select books -- as the NY Times does -- the USA Today list actually tracks scanned sales from some of the country's largest book stores, including Barnes & Noble, Amazon, Waldenbooks, Wal-Mart (ugh), Borders, and more. (The complete list is on the bottom of the page I've linked to.)

Anyway, it's an interesting list -- especially if you compare it to the NY Times list. Star Wars is #1 and #13 (a children's version, I guess), and Spider-Man is #32.

I see it as a problem, because Vivendi, along with Universal, Sony, BMG, and a bunch of other big labels, essentially sued mp3.com out of existence. Mp3.com owed hundreds of millions of dollars to the big labels after a judge ruled that they were in copyright violation. Their choice was either to be bought up, or cease to exist.

So Universal gobbled up mp3.com, cut payment to the artists, and turned it into a house organ for Universal's signed artists. Hardly a victory for the little guy.

Basically, it's good to see mainstream coverage for this story.

Net Radio Fears Heard in Congress
Yahoo writeup showing that we just might make a difference.

USAToday Coverage!!! Suave!!!

Most importantly, A sample letter to your congressman.

Of course, all courtesy of SOMAFM, my favorite internet radio group.

My fave is Groove Salad (128k pls feed)

Now come on, really, these guys aren't stupid. If it were possible to strip down Windows, they would have done it already and would be spending lots of money trying to dominate new markets.

I didn't say the technology wouldn't be necessarily be implemented. Simply that it wouldn't last.

Please, folks. This is not some nefarious Redmondian plot. It's simply a case of some middle-management MS trog going live with a website without running it by the legal department first. Had the MS legal eagles clapped eyes on this concoction before it debuted, there's no way that statement about "owning" licensed software ever would have seen the light of day.

I would be willing to believe this, if it wasn't coming from the legal department of the same company that submitted a doctored videotape as evidence in their antitrust trial.

Microsoft has repeatedly demonstrated that they're not above bending the truth slightly when it's to their advantage, so I refuse to give them the benefit of the doubt in this case.

Oh sure, if enough people complain, they'll throw their hands up, say "Good heavens! What is this? Well, we'll take care of this right away" and set about trying to say the exact same thing ("you are legally required to sell your computer with the operating system it came with") in less inflammatory words.

Jay (=
(Who is glad that the two PCs he owns are self-made -- no worries about which operating system it came with!)

So, what are they supposed to use, a really big passwd file? OpenLDAP? Novell NDS? A big Oracle database? Why should we even care what the technology is, as long as it works?

Maybe because it doesn't work.

ever thought of that?

Unfortunately, all the Microsoft-hating government pawns around here seem to have missed the real point of the article.

This isn't just "Microsoft-Hating"
These are valid concerns...

It's happened over and over again in the economy in the U.S. elsewhere.

Yes it is what traditional economist call "first mover status". Tom Peter's identifies the oil and gas industry of 100 years ago as benefitting from this status. 'First mover advantage' no longer an advantage

Telecoms is another good example - build the land lines and you have first mover status, hard for anyone else to get in or compete until their is a paradigm shift. Then your first mover status can become an albatross. David

I disagree. I think that when it comes time to choose which web sites to visit, or which portals to make your home page, people may make their choice by who follows P3P, and who doesn't. After all, if I have the choice of visiting Fox News or Cable News Network or USA Today, and each of which provide pretty much the same information, this could be the deciding factor.

Gee, I go to MSN and they protect my privacy, vs. Yahoo who will sell my information first chance they get, I think I would rather visit the site that has the better privacy policy, and thanks to P3P I know who that is!

Are they the same company that offered PC's to schools, and then backed out on the deal?

Sega found that out the hard way. It's all about staying power and the games that will come out.

Remember, the PS2 is already starting it's third generation of games, whereas both the X-Box and GC are starting to hit the second wave. Comparing first generation waves of both systems, I'd say the PS2 had NO killer apps (Grand Turismo is arguably the first real killer app for the PS2) whereas the Xbox came out of the door with one (Halo, which is arguably the best console game released to this day) and Nintendo had Rebel Assault.)

The second XBox wave promises tons of games on my "to-buy list" including exclusives like Spiderman, World Series Baseball 2K2, Crazy Taxi 3, Morrowind (coming to the PC too), the Matrix, MGSX, and ToeJam & Earl.

So the second xbox wave looks very good. The second GC wave also looks very good (a new mario, a new zelda, a new metroid and the resident evil remakes.)

Finally, everyone expected the X-Box to bomb in Japan. It's the first time a non-japanese company is actually making a console, and the Japanese hvae a strong tendency to be loyal to products produced in their country by their mega-corps. Look at car penetration stats for the country and it'll prove my point right away.

Besides, as ALWAYS has been the case (why don't analysts EVER remember?) it's not over till it's over. Remember how dominant the Genesis was even AFTER the SNES was out for a year? Remember who won that one?

Its too bad the Boston Globe article was the only one posted in this story. It does not go into any detail on his actual ideas. I suggest reading:
USA Today
ABC News
Mallett's Personal Homepage

The sequel to lovegety has already been done, kinda.

This is only a small subset of what he's proposing, but it's more than just an idea.

The correct url is here.

at Yahoo

and CNET

even USAToday

Sig: What Happened To The Censorware Project (censorware.org)