Hmm.. sounds like basically the same setup I have. 1024x768 on a 17" monitor. I'll agree with the other response here, the font on his site is larger than that of Slashdot. It seems fine to me.
Am I the only one who thinks that the text is not small? I'm running win95 with netscape 4.7 here at work and the font size seems fine to me. Larger than most sites even. What platform/browser are you using?
any how can you support "some" of css2 and claim 100% standards compliance?
They aren't claiming 100% compliance with every standard, just the ones they listed, html 4.0, css1, DOM, etc. They specifically state that css2 is not fully supported yet (i think they said it was 40 or 60% supported, and counting).
Bill shared his ideas with Time magazine. Doubt that many knowledgeable people were able to read through those without either falling out of their chair laughing, or nodding off several times.
You can go to any support company you want and have them do the work you need. You needn't be stuck paying outrageous support fees if there are multiple vendors with equal access to the OS. They will have to compete for your business. Beats the hell out of having to pay $150 for a 10 minute call (after they've had you on hold for half an hour) only to be told that the problem you're having is still an "outstanding issue."
*Sigh* I never said that Linux was created before the GNU project. I just said that the GNU software was added to Linux later, which is true. Additionally, just because Linus used standards, that doesn't mean he didn't write the implementation himself, and then continued with the help of others. Torvalds isn't a god, but he didn't just find Linux in a cereal box either.
STALLMAN is who you should worship. He has laser-vision and fire-breath and magic powers. Don't fuck with him!
Torvalds didn't buy an OS from anyone and use it as a basis for Linux. Linux was written from scratch. Then then Stallman's GNU software was added a bit later so that it actually had some decent functionality.
Was that really a copyright issue though? Can the US government even own a copyright? I may be wrong on this, but I thought the government wasn't allowed to hold copyright on anything. They're allowed to have secrets, but that's a different issue than copyright.
Now that AMD has the upper hand in the market they have no problem changing around specs so Intel chips wont work with their motherboards.
I would hardly say that AMD has the upper hand. They were (and still are really) barely surviving. Just because they aren't cloning intel processors doesn't mean they are deliberately trying to shut intel out. They don't have the market power to do anything of the sort. Besides, by making intel chips not work on their motherboards, they also guarantee that their chips don't work on intel motherboards. It doesn't have anything to do with the kinds of tactics that Microsoft uses.
So anyone can read the document and create an implementation without Microsoft's permission now? They don't have to illegally copy the document or anything. I'm curious to know how the situation stands right now.
By using posts without the author's permission, Slashdot and Jon Katz may be setting themselves up for a copyright lawsuit, but that is up to the people whose posts they used in the book. If Katz is correct, and those people really wanted their letters used in the book, and didn't really want to be contacted for fear of reprisals if the wrong people find out, then there shouldn't be any lawsuits. Either way, it doesn't change the fact that posts are owned by the posters.
True, but with the rise of sales, the record industry will have a difficult time proving harm in their various mp3-related lawsuits. Granted, it might not be a requirement in every case, but if it is, i'm not sure how they would offer proof of harm. Same goes for the MPAA in their DeCSS lawsuit. I hope the injunction against the defendants is overturned due to the fact that there is simply no evidence of "irreparable harm" to the movie industry.
Is it just US imports that are expensive in the UK, or is it all cds? If it's all cds, then whose fault is it really? UK imports purchased in the US also cost an arm and a leg, usually from $30 on up. Pretty much any Euro imported cds are priced similarly. It would seem like both sides are getting screwed on the imports, and this case seems unlikely to affect that.
Yeah, but Visor's suck for gameboy-type games because they don't have the cross-pad type button setup. That makes most games all but unplayable. There will be some that will work ok, but it might not be worth the effort.
That's an indirect effect. Linux boxes and Apples don't contribute to the chaos like Outlook/Windows boxes do. There's no denying that it is Outlook that is the root of the problem.
Sure. There's already a Tiger Woods Golf cartridge for it. I'm sure others will pop up soon if they haven't already. I have a Visor. I'd like to have a game or two for it to pass the time when I'm stuck someplace boring.
I remember when DATs were first announced, everybody was drooling over them. Thought they would replace the cassette tape. Then we found out how much they'd cost and that you couldn't copy a tape unless you had an un-hobbled deck, which you couldn't buy very easily, and which were more expensive. They never penetrated the consumer market really. I think they're mainly used in studios now.
I've reposted the above questions in the main thread. I separated them into one question per post there. If you think any of these are worthy questions, please mod up the individual posts since the the post I'm replying to is not likely to make it to Metallica due to having too many questions in it. Or maybe you'll just mod me into oblivion. You could do that too:)
Is it desirable or possible, in your opinion, to link artists and their fans more directly so that fans can support the artists they like without feeling like they've been taken to the cleaners by the record companies and middlemen?
Do you believe that the current model of distribution is becoming outdated and that a better model should be found that eliminates much of the overhead associated with the cost of a cd today, thus reducing costs for fans and increasing profits for artists?
Is the availability of MP3s allowing people to be more discriminating in their purchases since they can listen to an album before deciding to buy it? Do you believe that people should or should not be able to do this?
This is a multi-part question. Many people think that the RIAA's claims of harm to artists are way overblown. Has any research been done on the actual effects that MP3 distribution has on artists? For instance, do you know that the people downloading the music do not own the albums? Do you know whether they actually keep and listen to the MP3s rather than purchasing the cds, or do they delete what they don't like and buy what they do like? Could MP3s actually be helping record sales by exposing people to more music that they would not have purchased because they had never heard it? Has there been any investigation at all of what's really going on before the lawsuits were filed?
Slashdot Mirror
Hmm.. sounds like basically the same setup I have. 1024x768 on a 17" monitor. I'll agree with the other response here, the font on his site is larger than that of Slashdot. It seems fine to me.
Am I the only one who thinks that the text is not small? I'm running win95 with netscape 4.7 here at work and the font size seems fine to me. Larger than most sites even. What platform/browser are you using?
any how can you support "some" of css2 and claim 100% standards compliance?
They aren't claiming 100% compliance with every standard, just the ones they listed, html 4.0, css1, DOM, etc. They specifically state that css2 is not fully supported yet (i think they said it was 40 or 60% supported, and counting).
Bill shared his ideas with Time magazine. Doubt that many knowledgeable people were able to read through those without either falling out of their chair laughing, or nodding off several times.
You can go to any support company you want and have them do the work you need. You needn't be stuck paying outrageous support fees if there are multiple vendors with equal access to the OS. They will have to compete for your business. Beats the hell out of having to pay $150 for a 10 minute call (after they've had you on hold for half an hour) only to be told that the problem you're having is still an "outstanding issue."
*Sigh* I never said that Linux was created before the GNU project. I just said that the GNU software was added to Linux later, which is true. Additionally, just because Linus used standards, that doesn't mean he didn't write the implementation himself, and then continued with the help of others. Torvalds isn't a god, but he didn't just find Linux in a cereal box either.
STALLMAN is who you should worship. He has laser-vision and fire-breath and magic powers. Don't fuck with him!
This, however, is true :)
j/k
Torvalds didn't buy an OS from anyone and use it as a basis for Linux. Linux was written from scratch. Then then Stallman's GNU software was added a bit later so that it actually had some decent functionality.
Was that really a copyright issue though? Can the US government even own a copyright? I may be wrong on this, but I thought the government wasn't allowed to hold copyright on anything. They're allowed to have secrets, but that's a different issue than copyright.
Now that AMD has the upper hand in the market they have no problem changing around specs so Intel chips wont work with their motherboards.
I would hardly say that AMD has the upper hand. They were (and still are really) barely surviving. Just because they aren't cloning intel processors doesn't mean they are deliberately trying to shut intel out. They don't have the market power to do anything of the sort. Besides, by making intel chips not work on their motherboards, they also guarantee that their chips don't work on intel motherboards. It doesn't have anything to do with the kinds of tactics that Microsoft uses.
How are sales taxes the most regressive taxes?
So anyone can read the document and create an implementation without Microsoft's permission now? They don't have to illegally copy the document or anything. I'm curious to know how the situation stands right now.
By using posts without the author's permission, Slashdot and Jon Katz may be setting themselves up for a copyright lawsuit, but that is up to the people whose posts they used in the book. If Katz is correct, and those people really wanted their letters used in the book, and didn't really want to be contacted for fear of reprisals if the wrong people find out, then there shouldn't be any lawsuits. Either way, it doesn't change the fact that posts are owned by the posters.
True, but with the rise of sales, the record industry will have a difficult time proving harm in their various mp3-related lawsuits. Granted, it might not be a requirement in every case, but if it is, i'm not sure how they would offer proof of harm. Same goes for the MPAA in their DeCSS lawsuit. I hope the injunction against the defendants is overturned due to the fact that there is simply no evidence of "irreparable harm" to the movie industry.
Is it just US imports that are expensive in the UK, or is it all cds? If it's all cds, then whose fault is it really? UK imports purchased in the US also cost an arm and a leg, usually from $30 on up. Pretty much any Euro imported cds are priced similarly. It would seem like both sides are getting screwed on the imports, and this case seems unlikely to affect that.
Yeah, but Visor's suck for gameboy-type games because they don't have the cross-pad type button setup. That makes most games all but unplayable. There will be some that will work ok, but it might not be worth the effort.
That's an indirect effect. Linux boxes and Apples don't contribute to the chaos like Outlook/Windows boxes do. There's no denying that it is Outlook that is the root of the problem.
Sure. There's already a Tiger Woods Golf cartridge for it. I'm sure others will pop up soon if they haven't already. I have a Visor. I'd like to have a game or two for it to pass the time when I'm stuck someplace boring.
I remember when DATs were first announced, everybody was drooling over them. Thought they would replace the cassette tape. Then we found out how much they'd cost and that you couldn't copy a tape unless you had an un-hobbled deck, which you couldn't buy very easily, and which were more expensive. They never penetrated the consumer market really. I think they're mainly used in studios now.
Whether this prior art specifically invalidates some or all of the patent claims is a question I can't answer.
The patent office probably couldn't figure it out either. Perhaps that's why they aren't qualified to be making the decisions they're making.
I've reposted the above questions in the main thread. I separated them into one question per post there. If you think any of these are worthy questions, please mod up the individual posts since the the post I'm replying to is not likely to make it to Metallica due to having too many questions in it. Or maybe you'll just mod me into oblivion. You could do that too :)
Is it desirable or possible, in your opinion, to link artists and their fans more directly so that fans can support the artists they like without feeling like they've been taken to the cleaners by the record companies and middlemen?
Do you believe that the current model of distribution is becoming outdated and that a better model should be found that eliminates much of the overhead associated with the cost of a cd today, thus reducing costs for fans and increasing profits for artists?
Do you believe that a significant number of your fans will download your music to avoid paying for it?
Is the availability of MP3s allowing people to be more discriminating in their purchases since they can listen to an album before deciding to buy it? Do you believe that people should or should not be able to do this?
This is a multi-part question. Many people think that the RIAA's claims of harm to artists are way overblown. Has any research been done on the actual effects that MP3 distribution has on artists? For instance, do you know that the people downloading the music do not own the albums? Do you know whether they actually keep and listen to the MP3s rather than purchasing the cds, or do they delete what they don't like and buy what they do like? Could MP3s actually be helping record sales by exposing people to more music that they would not have purchased because they had never heard it? Has there been any investigation at all of what's really going on before the lawsuits were filed?