WTF do you care what happens to people running pirated copies?
This isn't about people who intentionall use pirated copies. This is about Bulk, whoelsale pirate copies, where the user has paid someone full price for what they think is a legitimate copy of windows.
Does this mean that the source code would be freely available, but that you couldn't use it without paying them? I skimmed the artical and linked pages, but can't figure out what this would actually mean.
He could spend his days fixing up the houses of all the people he bilked - painting, mowing their lawns, etc.
How do you make someone serve their sentence without threat of imprisonment if they don't cooperate? In your example, what if he refuses to help fix the houses, or dares to leaves his home after the curfew? Sure, you could place an armed guard on his house, but then you have effectively turned his home into a prison.
"But it is Linux's fault if a piece of hardware isn't supported in Linux."
I don't agree with that statement at all. I've always blamed the hardware vendor. In fact, if you dig around in my posting history you will find a post where I take this exact stance against someone who suggested that it was RedHat's responsibility to provide drivers for his printer.
The operating system doesn't know anything about how hardware is implemented, that's why we have drivers in the first place. It's only the hardware manufacturer who has access to that information. The very fact that ANY hardware comes with drivers built in to ANY operating system is a little amazing to me.
"Vista wouldn't support the perfectly good Epson Perfection 1200U scanner that I bought some years ago, and for which Epson chose not to release Vista drivers. Likewise for other devices."
No. Epson choose to not support your scanner any more. It's not Microsoft's fault that a 3rd party decided not to fully support your hardware with drivers for the latest OS. Vista would support it perfectly fine if Epson would write drivers for it, but they are banking on you choosing to buy a newer model scanner.
I'm referring purely to the tax portion of the price. By following your plan you would be stealing from the poor people to subsidize the cost of the rich.
Not quite. P2P apps usually open large numbers of connections.
I don't see it makes a different how many connections there are. The ISP shouldn't really even be aware of the number of open connections a user has. The "connection" is just a seriese of packets, ISPs don't have a fixed number of connections that thier users can use. It's all jsut bits and bandwidth. A single connection is just as capable of eating the same amount of bandwidth as 100 connections.
"Making me repeat far too much tedious stuff in order to get to the point where I failed last time."
On the other hand it really ruins a game for me when, upon failing, I immediatly respawn right where I died last. This totally removes any challenge, death no longer has any meaning in the game, and it becomes a boring walk right to the end of the game.
Why would this be limited to just Unix boxes? I've seen plenty of windows, mac, linux, etc network servers with the same kind of strange naming conventions.
Then of course there's the simple logistics of how you stock and sell that many flat screen TVs. I suspect this is non-trivial. There just are not that many unhelpful sales clerks to go around, let alone to process the returns when people find a better buy the next week.
What do flat panel TVs have to do with the switch at all? You do realize that old CRTs will continue to work perfectly, right? This is all about signal decoding and if the TV is capable of decoding the signal properly, not about how it's displayed by the device.
Monopoly isn't all about market share. It is about anti-competitive practices.
Sorry, but this is wrong. A Monopoly has nothing to do with being anti-copetitive, and everything to do with market share. Monopolies them selves are not illegal, the only become illegal when they activly act anti-competitivly. If I invent something new, with nothing at all like it existing, I have a monopoly, a legal monopoly.
in par with that, acting anti-competitively is not illegal if you are not a monopoly, as long as the individual action is not illegal that is.
Just curious, but at what point is Microsoft no longer considered a monopoloy? At what percentage are they legally allowed to start pulling the dirty tricks again?
I think the point is that the end result is the same: an idea goes unheard. That one is morally repugnant and the other is not is a separate issue.
Your ideas also go unheard if you don't tell them to anyone, but that ISN'T censorship. Censorship has very specific deffinitions, and this doesnt fit any of them.
If i buy a video game and my computer just bearly meets the minimium system requirements I don't get to sue the company that made it when i can't run it with the highest graphics settings.
Vista Basic does not run Aero because the machines cannot support it.
No. Vista basic does not run Aero because it is not included in Vista Basic. My 4gb, quad core x64 based system is capable of using Aero, but if i install vista basic on it I still wont have aero. But Vista Basic IS a version of Vista. If that machine can boot and run Vista basic than it is a vista capable system, this lawsuit should be thrown out.
Slashdot Mirror
This isn't about people who intentionall use pirated copies. This is about Bulk, whoelsale pirate copies, where the user has paid someone full price for what they think is a legitimate copy of windows.
Does anyone know if there are any plans to add full PDF support to the orriginal Kindle and Kindle 2?
Does this mean that the source code would be freely available, but that you couldn't use it without paying them? I skimmed the artical and linked pages, but can't figure out what this would actually mean.
Creative use of an intern and a blue dress.
How do you make someone serve their sentence without threat of imprisonment if they don't cooperate? In your example, what if he refuses to help fix the houses, or dares to leaves his home after the curfew? Sure, you could place an armed guard on his house, but then you have effectively turned his home into a prison.
Except for the ones that, you know, died.
I don't agree with that statement at all. I've always blamed the hardware vendor. In fact, if you dig around in my posting history you will find a post where I take this exact stance against someone who suggested that it was RedHat's responsibility to provide drivers for his printer.
The operating system doesn't know anything about how hardware is implemented, that's why we have drivers in the first place. It's only the hardware manufacturer who has access to that information. The very fact that ANY hardware comes with drivers built in to ANY operating system is a little amazing to me.
That's like saying tires are going to replace cars, it doesn't make any sense.
No. Epson choose to not support your scanner any more. It's not Microsoft's fault that a 3rd party decided not to fully support your hardware with drivers for the latest OS. Vista would support it perfectly fine if Epson would write drivers for it, but they are banking on you choosing to buy a newer model scanner.
Don't blame Microsoft for Epson's greed.
I'm referring purely to the tax portion of the price. By following your plan you would be stealing from the poor people to subsidize the cost of the rich.
Nope, I believe the "poor" should pay less because the price impacts them more.
I don't see it makes a different how many connections there are. The ISP shouldn't really even be aware of the number of open connections a user has. The "connection" is just a seriese of packets, ISPs don't have a fixed number of connections that thier users can use. It's all jsut bits and bandwidth. A single connection is just as capable of eating the same amount of bandwidth as 100 connections.
p2p was designed to cause congestion in the same way that cars were designed to cause traffic jams.
On the other hand it really ruins a game for me when, upon failing, I immediatly respawn right where I died last. This totally removes any challenge, death no longer has any meaning in the game, and it becomes a boring walk right to the end of the game.
Why would this be limited to just Unix boxes? I've seen plenty of windows, mac, linux, etc network servers with the same kind of strange naming conventions.
What do flat panel TVs have to do with the switch at all? You do realize that old CRTs will continue to work perfectly, right? This is all about signal decoding and if the TV is capable of decoding the signal properly, not about how it's displayed by the device.
Following that logic it would be ok for the RIAA to access your computer without permission to stop you from sharing music.
Sorry, but this is wrong. A Monopoly has nothing to do with being anti-copetitive, and everything to do with market share. Monopolies them selves are not illegal, the only become illegal when they activly act anti-competitivly. If I invent something new, with nothing at all like it existing, I have a monopoly, a legal monopoly.
in par with that, acting anti-competitively is not illegal if you are not a monopoly, as long as the individual action is not illegal that is.
Just curious, but at what point is Microsoft no longer considered a monopoloy? At what percentage are they legally allowed to start pulling the dirty tricks again?
Dude, I am so spending tonight checking /dev/random to see if Half Life 7 has been releasd yet :)
So basically the cost of 2 new mac books?
[rim-shot] Thanks folks, im here all week.
Your ideas also go unheard if you don't tell them to anyone, but that ISN'T censorship. Censorship has very specific deffinitions, and this doesnt fit any of them.
hmm.... I remember a variant of http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windows-vista/compare-editions/default.aspx being around long before before vista shipped. Microsoft made it very clear that vista home basic did not include Aero.
If i buy a video game and my computer just bearly meets the minimium system requirements I don't get to sue the company that made it when i can't run it with the highest graphics settings.
Everything that uses the vista kernel should be considered Vista.
By your logic if I install Ubuntu on a system that can't run xWindows and display the gui then I havent installed Ubuntu.
No. Vista basic does not run Aero because it is not included in Vista Basic. My 4gb, quad core x64 based system is capable of using Aero, but if i install vista basic on it I still wont have aero. But Vista Basic IS a version of Vista. If that machine can boot and run Vista basic than it is a vista capable system, this lawsuit should be thrown out.