You are acting as though a boycott never accomplished anything.
The situation is simple. Mobile service in the US is crappy because the companies who offer it have set a crappy status quo. It would be good (and entirely possible) to make these companies stop offering crappy plans and service in general. Two ways to do that are:
1) Express dissatisfaction with mobile service to these companies, and hope this frightens them into offering better service.
2) Express dissatisfaction with mobile service to elected officials, and hope to pressure them to force companies to offer better service through some kind of legislation.
Both options have their pitfalls, and both options have been known to work in various cases. Please don't ignore this with your dogmatic post, and mods, why is such detrimental bias insightful?
I don't know why it makes you feel not so bad. Yes, Eolas managed to force its will upon Microsoft, but what did that ultimately accomplish? Flash embeds functioning poorly in IE, *OR* extra work on the part of web developers to use the workaround. Yay. Microsoft just passed the headache onto the users and forgot about it.
"This bill, on and after July 1, 2008, would prohibit a person,
business, or agency, as defined, that sells goods or services to any
resident of California..."
Uh... It seems pretty clear that it covers more than "retailers."
I tried to read the article and thought I was just spacing out, but after reading your comments I went back and realized I was having trouble reading the article because it was written in pigeon english. Thank you.
I'm sure MOST people hate her because she's a popular democrat, and they are not democrats. They cannot understand why she is a democrat, and that makes them angrier at her, and even worse, they are not sure why they are not democrats, which makes them even more confused.
Now, I hate all career politicians because they are liars and crooks, but I am against her because she (along with Bill) is a self-described communitarian, or, somebody who thinks that every citizen has a DUTY to help every other citizen, and this frightens me. I have a moral obligation to help (deserving) people when I can, but I don't want to be forced by the government to help lazy people be lazy. It's too close to communism for my comfort.
But most important of all, when the GTA hot-coffee stuff happened, she, a democrat, was one of the first to jump on the bandwagon of decrying the game and the developers for something that you don't get unless you download THIRD PARTY software. If the democrats won't protect our smut from prudes, who will?
So I know that racecar drivers have their seats custom molded to their bodies, both for comfort, and for safety. I would expect that these suits would have to be custom fit in order to absorb impacts in a way that was safe for the people wearing them. I would imagine that would get much more expensive than $2000 per suit.
Slashdot Mirror
this is not a troll
Pay attention. The person to whom you are replying was describing the point of view of the authorities, not his own point of view.
You are acting as though a boycott never accomplished anything.
The situation is simple. Mobile service in the US is crappy because the companies who offer it have set a crappy status quo. It would be good (and entirely possible) to make these companies stop offering crappy plans and service in general. Two ways to do that are:
1) Express dissatisfaction with mobile service to these companies, and hope this frightens them into offering better service.
2) Express dissatisfaction with mobile service to elected officials, and hope to pressure them to force companies to offer better service through some kind of legislation.
Both options have their pitfalls, and both options have been known to work in various cases. Please don't ignore this with your dogmatic post, and mods, why is such detrimental bias insightful?
I don't know why it makes you feel not so bad. Yes, Eolas managed to force its will upon Microsoft, but what did that ultimately accomplish? Flash embeds functioning poorly in IE, *OR* extra work on the part of web developers to use the workaround. Yay. Microsoft just passed the headache onto the users and forgot about it.
"This bill, on and after July 1, 2008, would prohibit a person, business, or agency, as defined, that sells goods or services to any resident of California..." Uh... It seems pretty clear that it covers more than "retailers."
how is quoting Abraham Simpson a troll? Is abraham simpson taboo on slashdot?
I seem to remember that Eolas has stated that open source projects will not be targeted in the way microsoft was (hence mozilla not being pursued ).
I tried to read the article and thought I was just spacing out, but after reading your comments I went back and realized I was having trouble reading the article because it was written in pigeon english. Thank you.
I'm sure MOST people hate her because she's a popular democrat, and they are not democrats. They cannot understand why she is a democrat, and that makes them angrier at her, and even worse, they are not sure why they are not democrats, which makes them even more confused. Now, I hate all career politicians because they are liars and crooks, but I am against her because she (along with Bill) is a self-described communitarian, or, somebody who thinks that every citizen has a DUTY to help every other citizen, and this frightens me. I have a moral obligation to help (deserving) people when I can, but I don't want to be forced by the government to help lazy people be lazy. It's too close to communism for my comfort. But most important of all, when the GTA hot-coffee stuff happened, she, a democrat, was one of the first to jump on the bandwagon of decrying the game and the developers for something that you don't get unless you download THIRD PARTY software. If the democrats won't protect our smut from prudes, who will?
stroke?
So I know that racecar drivers have their seats custom molded to their bodies, both for comfort, and for safety. I would expect that these suits would have to be custom fit in order to absorb impacts in a way that was safe for the people wearing them. I would imagine that would get much more expensive than $2000 per suit.