I would complain about you breaking keychain integration, most people I know hate when someone does crap like that, and they just stop asking for your help because they're afraid you'll just break something else.
So does that make the CIA an illegal organization then? I mean, it's their job to spy on foreign countries.
That's a strawman. Firstly because it's the NSA that's conducting surveillance, not the CIA. Secondly because I said the Constitution requires a warrant to conduct a search, not that spying is illegal. Having judicial oversight is the designated balance between the government not being able to perform its duties to defend the country and the government growing into an oppressive tyranny. I have no problem with legal intelligence gathering. The rules are spelled out, and there's a process that allows for changing them.
If the Constitution applies to ALL people of the earth, shouldn't we be invading all these other countries and removing their current, illegal governments? Shouldn't these people be voting in elections and sending the winners to Washington to serve in Congress? Shouldn't we be taxing their populations? Shouldn't we be using our military to guarantee these rights to the peoples of the world?
We have been using our military to "spread democracy" for 60 years, and the CIA to overthrow democracy and install dictators, and then often have to send in the military to remove them. It's why so many people around the world hate us. If an oppressed group of people need and seek outside help, then I have no problem with international forces coming to the rescue. We just need to follow our Constitution by declaring war with a clear and well-defined goal and follow the Geneva Conventions.
Also, "inalienable human rights" was in the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution. Tell me how I'm the confused one again?
You're confused because you inferred a quotation where the was none, notice the lack of such notation in my original post. The discussion is regarding the legality of certain government actions. The Declaration of Independence says why we needed a new government. The Constitution defines that government, in such a way as to honor those inalienable human rights. So any discussion of what the government can and can't do must therefore refer to the Constitution.
go dig up the testimony of the AT&T engineer whistleblower, and the Qwest CEO. The surveillance rooms intercept all calls coming over the lines. There is no way for the telcos to route specific calls. During the onset of these programs, no language was involved to specify domestic versus international traffic. The overwhelming majority of traffic going thru some of the centers is domestic. And since you seem so confused, the Constitution is all about inalienable human rights, not inalienable American rights. It says the government needs warrants that specify parameters about what's being search: who; when; where. The very architectural design of this surveillance system (surveil everything that goes through a call center at all times) breaks the specificity requirements.
some technician who works for a major communications network can upload the list of names/numbers they've been tasked to set up monitors on.
The original AT&T engineer who blew the whistle already testified that this system doesn't have any capacity to single out communications streams. The lines are physically routed, en masse, into a secret room and everything going over those lines is subject to NSA surveillance.
not having the local storage or a network adapter to support profiles 1.1 and 2.0 is also a limitation of the hardware. HD-DVD can do 1080p, there's just a lot of players that don't.
Many artists have sued their labels for unpaid royalties. Some have even sued to get their share of p2p lawsuit moneys. It doesn't get widely publicized.
Since you asked, I've seen plenty. Including two people I work with (a Java developer and an InstallShield developer), one unlocked for Tmobile. Seen a few at grocery stores and hockey rinks. Also know of at least one person at Harmonix who has one.
I want one myself (but I'm waiting for the final word on first telecom immunity and second the current lawsuits against AT&T and friends). I like the interface. Everyone I know who has played with one agrees that it has the best interface. I've tried to use other similar features on nokia, samsung, and motorola phones, and even manage to convince myself of their adequacy. Until I pick up an iphone and realize the sad truth that for the market segment it targets, nothing else I've tried out comes close to the iphone.
Separating the human readable and machine readable ballot, and then shredding the human readable one, keeps the door open for tampering with the counting software (you might have marked choice A for your candidate on the human readable ballot but what if the counting software counts choice A as a different candidate). How do you then prove how it was supposed to be counted? If you're going to in some way securely preserve the human readable portion, why bother separating them in the first place? Also if you keep a copy of your cast ballot then a voters can be intimidated by threat of retaliation, and bribed with certainty of the result. What is so freaking bad about a ballot which is simultaneously human and machine readable which is turned in via secret ballot? It seems to work ok for the many other countries with international oversight.
When the Intel minis and iMacs came out, it was cheaper to upgrade the memory on a build-to-order configuration. I don't think that's true anymore though.
buying proprietary music from iTunes is completely out of the question
In terms of licensing, encoding AAC audio content in an MPEG4 container is less proprietary than MP3. The only part that isn't an open standard is FairPlay, which is also the least restrictive DRM you'll find.
On another subject, it's also interesting that earlier this year Steve Jobs was whining how he wanted to sell DRM-free music, but "they" wouldn't let him. Well, Steve, Amazon is doing it. Why aren't you?
Apple started selling DRM-free music back in May, before Amazon released their big MP3 store. Your username couldn't possibly be more ironic.
ever since AT&T had a GSM network (before Cingular bought AT&T Wireless, before SBC bought AT&T, before AT&T bought SBC, before Cingular changed its name to AT&T) you could use any GSM phone on their network.
there are free over-the-air HD signals uncompressed for the major broadcast networks. Since it's uncompressed you can conceivably get better signal quality for those channels than the respective cable feeds.
I don't use FLAC because my primary home desktop is a Mac and I genuinely like using iTunes to manage my library. I use ALAC for my home library and convert to AAC/MP4 for mobile needs to conserve space. When using Linux on my laptop, I've found that rhythmbox and Amarok just aren't Good Enough for me at this time. Amarok's shuffle album feature is broken (uses artist in the query, so Various Artist albums only play tracks by a single artist before moving to the next album) and Rhythmbox just plain doesn't have an option to shuffle albums. Amarok never seemed to use the embedded album art, so that disk space is duplicated by creating its own cache. Rhythmbox seems to try, but half the time it doesn't work. And lastly, using Amarok in Gnome (Ubuntu 7.04) the multimedia keys don't work. There is a backported script form the 7.10 package that apparently works iff Amarok has focus, but not when minimized. It's just not practical for me to use FLAC at this time.
every device I have that can play digital music can play AAC files. Because I paid attention. I've never bought anything from iTunes Store and don't own an iPod. And I've recommended to all my friends and family to just buy the CDs and rip to lossless.
There are fewer IP restrictions on AAC/MP4 than there are on MP3, and the owners of the IP are pretty much the same people. I just don't like people ranting about something that isn't true (that AAC is an Apple proprietary format [no doubt invented to lock people into being Apple customers forever]).
I just hate repeated misinformation and unfair comparisons. Don't compare DRM tracks to non-DRM tracks, they aren't the same product. Apple sells two different music products at iTS, one with DRM, and one without. I've been telling everyone who will listen not to buy tracks that have DRM. But I'm also not going to sit and listen to people bitch about Apple's 'proprietary' AAC format. Especialy when the licensing for using that format is less restrictive than that of the MP3 format.
We don't want to go from MP3 to FLAC. We want to go [as close to original master] -> FLAC -> [current best lossy]. Right now that mostly means buy the CD, rip to FLAC, save FLAC as backup, convert to MP3/MP4/Ogg. Having the compression of FLAC without any quality loss means less backup storage media and means when a new lossy compression comes out that everyone supports, I can safely convert to that from FLAC instead of from a lossy format.
When will people get a fucking clue that the MP4 files that iTunes sells are not an Apple proprietary format? It's the codec developed to replace MP3. It was developed by the same freaking people who developed MP3. You know you can buy songs without DRM from iTunes? Thirty cent price jump for 256 kpbs MP4 (theoretically superior quality to 256 kbps MP3) with no DRM for individual tracks. No price jump if you buy the whole album. And reportedly Amazon's terms of service don't allow re-downloading of transfer of ownership.
Slashdot Mirror
it's not your choice to make for other people though.
I would complain about you breaking keychain integration, most people I know hate when someone does crap like that, and they just stop asking for your help because they're afraid you'll just break something else.
Movie studios dropping support for UMD didn't kill the PSP.
So does that make the CIA an illegal organization then? I mean, it's their job to spy on foreign countries.
That's a strawman. Firstly because it's the NSA that's conducting surveillance, not the CIA. Secondly because I said the Constitution requires a warrant to conduct a search, not that spying is illegal. Having judicial oversight is the designated balance between the government not being able to perform its duties to defend the country and the government growing into an oppressive tyranny. I have no problem with legal intelligence gathering. The rules are spelled out, and there's a process that allows for changing them.
If the Constitution applies to ALL people of the earth, shouldn't we be invading all these other countries and removing their current, illegal governments? Shouldn't these people be voting in elections and sending the winners to Washington to serve in Congress? Shouldn't we be taxing their populations? Shouldn't we be using our military to guarantee these rights to the peoples of the world?
We have been using our military to "spread democracy" for 60 years, and the CIA to overthrow democracy and install dictators, and then often have to send in the military to remove them. It's why so many people around the world hate us. If an oppressed group of people need and seek outside help, then I have no problem with international forces coming to the rescue. We just need to follow our Constitution by declaring war with a clear and well-defined goal and follow the Geneva Conventions.
Also, "inalienable human rights" was in the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution. Tell me how I'm the confused one again?
You're confused because you inferred a quotation where the was none, notice the lack of such notation in my original post. The discussion is regarding the legality of certain government actions. The Declaration of Independence says why we needed a new government. The Constitution defines that government, in such a way as to honor those inalienable human rights. So any discussion of what the government can and can't do must therefore refer to the Constitution.
go dig up the testimony of the AT&T engineer whistleblower, and the Qwest CEO. The surveillance rooms intercept all calls coming over the lines. There is no way for the telcos to route specific calls. During the onset of these programs, no language was involved to specify domestic versus international traffic. The overwhelming majority of traffic going thru some of the centers is domestic. And since you seem so confused, the Constitution is all about inalienable human rights, not inalienable American rights. It says the government needs warrants that specify parameters about what's being search: who; when; where. The very architectural design of this surveillance system (surveil everything that goes through a call center at all times) breaks the specificity requirements.
The original AT&T engineer who blew the whistle already testified that this system doesn't have any capacity to single out communications streams. The lines are physically routed, en masse, into a secret room and everything going over those lines is subject to NSA surveillance.
not having the local storage or a network adapter to support profiles 1.1 and 2.0 is also a limitation of the hardware. HD-DVD can do 1080p, there's just a lot of players that don't.
There are a lot of HD-DVD players that limit you to 1080i.
Many artists have sued their labels for unpaid royalties. Some have even sued to get their share of p2p lawsuit moneys. It doesn't get widely publicized.
The immunity is from civil suits, but the presidential pardon is for criminal prosecution/conviction.
Since you asked, I've seen plenty. Including two people I work with (a Java developer and an InstallShield developer), one unlocked for Tmobile. Seen a few at grocery stores and hockey rinks. Also know of at least one person at Harmonix who has one. I want one myself (but I'm waiting for the final word on first telecom immunity and second the current lawsuits against AT&T and friends). I like the interface. Everyone I know who has played with one agrees that it has the best interface. I've tried to use other similar features on nokia, samsung, and motorola phones, and even manage to convince myself of their adequacy. Until I pick up an iphone and realize the sad truth that for the market segment it targets, nothing else I've tried out comes close to the iphone.
can you try to pear down the puns?
Separating the human readable and machine readable ballot, and then shredding the human readable one, keeps the door open for tampering with the counting software (you might have marked choice A for your candidate on the human readable ballot but what if the counting software counts choice A as a different candidate). How do you then prove how it was supposed to be counted? If you're going to in some way securely preserve the human readable portion, why bother separating them in the first place? Also if you keep a copy of your cast ballot then a voters can be intimidated by threat of retaliation, and bribed with certainty of the result. What is so freaking bad about a ballot which is simultaneously human and machine readable which is turned in via secret ballot? It seems to work ok for the many other countries with international oversight.
When the Intel minis and iMacs came out, it was cheaper to upgrade the memory on a build-to-order configuration. I don't think that's true anymore though.
In terms of licensing, encoding AAC audio content in an MPEG4 container is less proprietary than MP3. The only part that isn't an open standard is FairPlay, which is also the least restrictive DRM you'll find.
On another subject, it's also interesting that earlier this year Steve Jobs was whining how he wanted to sell DRM-free music, but "they" wouldn't let him. Well, Steve, Amazon is doing it. Why aren't you?
Apple started selling DRM-free music back in May, before Amazon released their big MP3 store.
Your username couldn't possibly be more ironic.
ever since AT&T had a GSM network (before Cingular bought AT&T Wireless, before SBC bought AT&T, before AT&T bought SBC, before Cingular changed its name to AT&T) you could use any GSM phone on their network.
I think the OP was complaining that in the U.S.A Apple partnered with AT&T instead of T-Mobile.
there are free over-the-air HD signals uncompressed for the major broadcast networks. Since it's uncompressed you can conceivably get better signal quality for those channels than the respective cable feeds.
I don't use FLAC because my primary home desktop is a Mac and I genuinely like using iTunes to manage my library. I use ALAC for my home library and convert to AAC/MP4 for mobile needs to conserve space. When using Linux on my laptop, I've found that rhythmbox and Amarok just aren't Good Enough for me at this time. Amarok's shuffle album feature is broken (uses artist in the query, so Various Artist albums only play tracks by a single artist before moving to the next album) and Rhythmbox just plain doesn't have an option to shuffle albums. Amarok never seemed to use the embedded album art, so that disk space is duplicated by creating its own cache. Rhythmbox seems to try, but half the time it doesn't work. And lastly, using Amarok in Gnome (Ubuntu 7.04) the multimedia keys don't work. There is a backported script form the 7.10 package that apparently works iff Amarok has focus, but not when minimized. It's just not practical for me to use FLAC at this time.
every device I have that can play digital music can play AAC files. Because I paid attention. I've never bought anything from iTunes Store and don't own an iPod. And I've recommended to all my friends and family to just buy the CDs and rip to lossless. There are fewer IP restrictions on AAC/MP4 than there are on MP3, and the owners of the IP are pretty much the same people. I just don't like people ranting about something that isn't true (that AAC is an Apple proprietary format [no doubt invented to lock people into being Apple customers forever]).
I just hate repeated misinformation and unfair comparisons. Don't compare DRM tracks to non-DRM tracks, they aren't the same product. Apple sells two different music products at iTS, one with DRM, and one without. I've been telling everyone who will listen not to buy tracks that have DRM. But I'm also not going to sit and listen to people bitch about Apple's 'proprietary' AAC format. Especialy when the licensing for using that format is less restrictive than that of the MP3 format.
We don't want to go from MP3 to FLAC. We want to go [as close to original master] -> FLAC -> [current best lossy]. Right now that mostly means buy the CD, rip to FLAC, save FLAC as backup, convert to MP3/MP4/Ogg. Having the compression of FLAC without any quality loss means less backup storage media and means when a new lossy compression comes out that everyone supports, I can safely convert to that from FLAC instead of from a lossy format.
When will people get a fucking clue that the MP4 files that iTunes sells are not an Apple proprietary format? It's the codec developed to replace MP3. It was developed by the same freaking people who developed MP3. You know you can buy songs without DRM from iTunes? Thirty cent price jump for 256 kpbs MP4 (theoretically superior quality to 256 kbps MP3) with no DRM for individual tracks. No price jump if you buy the whole album. And reportedly Amazon's terms of service don't allow re-downloading of transfer of ownership.
do you have any references for what Qwest did or did not participate in?
Qwest said no.