Time to change the "guard" at the W3C methinks. Idiots like this don't help in the promulgation of what are supposed to be open standards, and if there are govt. officials that are reticent to speak up in a truly public forum I can only ask them "Who do you think pays your salaries?".
As far as I'm concerned, forcing the use of IE is a red flag that tells me that the site wants to infect my system with something... With very few exceptions, I personally will not view any such site.
Just another reason why I am boycotting anything Sony... They have received their last $$ from me - I even sold my WEGA TV last year and will not buy anything with their label on it (neither electronics nor media) until they make a 180-degree change in their attitude toward their customers in this regard. FU Sony!
AMD and frame buffer blockage
on
AMD's New DRM
·
· Score: 1
Well, so much for AMD if they proceed with this knuckle-headed plan. I am boycotting Sony for their DRM imbroglios (root-kit anyone?), and if AMD pursues this I will boycott them as well. There are a lot of image-processing algorithms that can only be performed within a reasonable time frame (sic) if one can get at the raw frame data. This will preclude AMD graphics chips or AMD CPU's with embedded graphics processors from many high-end image processing applications.
So, all I will say now is - GET A CLUE AMD! Do NOT presume you know what is best for your customers, or you will soon find that you don't have any...
Personally, I don't care. They are all tarred with the same brush as far as I'm concerned. If Sony corporate brought the hammer down on Sony BMG, et al, I imagine they would comply. It's too bad really. I like a lot of their consumer and professional electronics. However, there are alternatives and I have made a personal choice that companies that betray my trust and make no honest effort to redress those wrongs, will get no more support from me in any capacity if I am at all able to do so.
As for when the USAF bombs my house (hopefully I wouldn't be at home!:-), I would take my complaint to the company board and CEO (Congress, President), not to another division. In this case, my complaint is with the Sony Corporation as a whole. As a corporation, they need to deal with this crap.
Sorry, but Sony isn't getting one penny more from me until they totally change their attitudes about DRM and publicly and pointedly apologize for their rootkit fiasco. I don't care how good their products are, or how much better they are than their competition. No apology, no $$$. I think it's time we voted with our wallets and it really irks me that people are letting them get away with their anti-consumer, anti-customer anti-cs.
So I say, don't review their products and don't give them any air-time or press (internet or otherwise) until they are well and truly humbled.
This sort of drel is why I use and support Clamwin. I would rather make a donation from time to time and use open source (free) software than be held up for ransom by these crooks.
Personally, I would not like to see advertising on the Wikipedia. However, funding is an issue, although I recently donated $100USD to the foundation to do my part. I have this thing about funding those efforts I derive significant benefit from, like EFF, et al.
Anway, maybe something like a click-thru fee for commercial sites that link to Wikipedia articles? After all, if you click thru to a site advertised on Google, from Google, then Google gets its little slice of the pie. This is kind of like that, but in reverse.
On the other hand, articles about some medical condition for example, could have a discreet sidebar of links (not ads) to companies with products that are related to the condition in question. Then clicking thru to the commercial site could result in revenue for Wikipedia.
Again, I DO NOT want blatant advertising in the Wiki, but I would not be averse to a simple list of links to related commercial sites that are willing to pay something for the traffic generated by their presence on Wikipedia.
Slashdot Mirror
Time to change the "guard" at the W3C methinks. Idiots like this don't help in the promulgation of what are supposed to be open standards, and if there are govt. officials that are reticent to speak up in a truly public forum I can only ask them "Who do you think pays your salaries?".
Newspapers aren't a cure for Internet Addiction. They're a cause of it!
I wonder what would have happened if Campbell Soup sued Warhol for copyright infringement.
As far as I'm concerned, forcing the use of IE is a red flag that tells me that the site wants to infect my system with something... With very few exceptions, I personally will not view any such site.
Just another reason why I am boycotting anything Sony... They have received their last $$ from me - I even sold my WEGA TV last year and will not buy anything with their label on it (neither electronics nor media) until they make a 180-degree change in their attitude toward their customers in this regard. FU Sony!
Well, so much for AMD if they proceed with this knuckle-headed plan. I am boycotting Sony for their DRM imbroglios (root-kit anyone?), and if AMD pursues this I will boycott them as well. There are a lot of image-processing algorithms that can only be performed within a reasonable time frame (sic) if one can get at the raw frame data. This will preclude AMD graphics chips or AMD CPU's with embedded graphics processors from many high-end image processing applications. So, all I will say now is - GET A CLUE AMD! Do NOT presume you know what is best for your customers, or you will soon find that you don't have any...
Personally, I don't care. They are all tarred with the same brush as far as I'm concerned. If Sony corporate brought the hammer down on Sony BMG, et al, I imagine they would comply. It's too bad really. I like a lot of their consumer and professional electronics. However, there are alternatives and I have made a personal choice that companies that betray my trust and make no honest effort to redress those wrongs, will get no more support from me in any capacity if I am at all able to do so.
:-), I would take my complaint to the company board and CEO (Congress, President), not to another division. In this case, my complaint is with the Sony Corporation as a whole. As a corporation, they need to deal with this crap.
As for when the USAF bombs my house (hopefully I wouldn't be at home!
Sorry, but Sony isn't getting one penny more from me until they totally change their attitudes about DRM and publicly and pointedly apologize for their rootkit fiasco. I don't care how good their products are, or how much better they are than their competition. No apology, no $$$. I think it's time we voted with our wallets and it really irks me that people are letting them get away with their anti-consumer, anti-customer anti-cs.
So I say, don't review their products and don't give them any air-time or press (internet or otherwise) until they are well and truly humbled.
This sort of drel is why I use and support Clamwin. I would rather make a donation from time to time and use open source (free) software than be held up for ransom by these crooks.
I hope the developer of the violated product issues a take-down notice to MPAA's ISP. Turnabout is "fairplay", IMO.
Personally, I would not like to see advertising on the Wikipedia. However, funding is an issue, although I recently donated $100USD to the foundation to do my part. I have this thing about funding those efforts I derive significant benefit from, like EFF, et al.
Anway, maybe something like a click-thru fee for commercial sites that link to Wikipedia articles? After all, if you click thru to a site advertised on Google, from Google, then Google gets its little slice of the pie. This is kind of like that, but in reverse.
On the other hand, articles about some medical condition for example, could have a discreet sidebar of links (not ads) to companies with products that are related to the condition in question. Then clicking thru to the commercial site could result in revenue for Wikipedia.
Again, I DO NOT want blatant advertising in the Wiki, but I would not be averse to a simple list of links to related commercial sites that are willing to pay something for the traffic generated by their presence on Wikipedia.