I've had enough of this, NO! I don't give a crap about a copyright holder's renumeration. I give a damn about the renumeration of the artist. Just because some bloody monopolistic company has forced artists into joining them or die doesn't mean i should be forced to hand a penny over to these people- They're not providing a service they've just wedged themselves in between the consumer and the artist and have constructed a massive road block, saying to the artists "give us your copyright or no one will hear your music ever" and saying to the consumer "pay us or you'll never be allowed to hear music again"
It really does vary alot- you'll get one or two comments in almost every story, but this story seems to be very popular for trolls. If you want to judge how much trolling goes on, this would not be representative of the norm. Generally though, it's the same sentiments (exactly the same words often) and no doubt coming from the same places.
Just think about it, rather than people like George Bush having to declare war on a region and kill millions of innocent people, they can just drug the nation in to voting for them. Although I suspect rigging the vote again will remain the prefered option- tried and tested, and most probably considerably cheaper.
Why all I see on their website is a picture of a laptop (how the hell could you tell the specs from the outside) and some memory sticks (MMC, USB, and SD) which have been photoshopped(not photoshopped, MS PAINTED) to add 2 or 3 pins, and maybe crop a bit of it here and there, and then super impose a random set of "free megabytes" I mean honestly what the hell is going on- what happened at the show because from the looks of this site he would just be ignored! There's nothing plausible about this at all.
"If you haven't noticed, I'm funny and enjoy having fun. Enjoy my site, tell me if you use my projects. Don't take it too seriously though, it's all an act."
My initial reaction was "What the hell, you theiving bastard stealing technology from a non-profit organization" But when you look at it, what difference does it make going out and selling these cheap laptops for profit, firstly the main selling point is gone, and the market is gone, so its just another cheap laptop- all be it with a littl einteresting technology, but nonetheless, atleast here in the UK that market has already been entered (asus eepc) so, betrayal- probably morally rather than contractually (Sp?), good move- probably not actually.
Obviously thats just not true of all open source software. However, with some OSS, like Open office, I just can't be bothered, because they're trying to replace closed source software, not making it in their own right, just copying it, no creativity just coding for the sake of it being open source and giving them a warm fuzzy feeling inside. For me, using Open office at the moment is like stepping back to ms office 10 years ago, why would I do that- ms office came with my PC so it hasnt cost me anything (it did, but not directly) and more importantly in businesses the users aren't charged anything- it's just an office expense. The guy does have a point though: it's no longer enough just to be open source, to be accepted you MUST be open source and useful. I think it's a step that was missed when the OSS developers started looking for larger distribution to people who weren't intereseted in computer ethics.
This truly is poor excuse for an article on slashot, and i mean on epic proportions (although that is getting more often now days). It's like "look, this is advertising, lets give them some free publicity"- its a good way of loosing credibility very fast
So you want microsoft to not support those 'web designers' who have gone out of their way to support microsoft's browser in the past by writing customized non-compliant code just to work with microsoft.
With text and facts wikipedia sites places where it got the information as a resource to prove what is written is true, or they state when they can't site the source. Now with mathematical equations the source is the proof, so it doesn't make any sense not to state how it was proven. However, that being said, some proofs are very long and often people don't want to see them, so possibly put the proofs as a separate page (like clicking on an image to see it at higher quality) See what I've written, its called continuity in policy and I think it's the only way for wikipedia to gain/retain their credibility as a source for mathematics.
The old stuff, every time. My reasoning, even though it is old, it is by the same companies, so presumably the newer software is a logical progression on their features, so even though it'll be different, when the people you are teaching encounter the new stuff they'll have a basic understanding of the purpose of the programming, how the particular coders work and the step up shouldn't be too hard. Think of it like this, it's easier to learn italian when you know latin than when you know English. However you do have to decide whether you value educating people to use software that you think is ethically better over the small difference in the relevance. I personally would find myself as a teaching deciding to use the old software as that's what I think will give the best education, but each to their own.
But 1 type of zune vs. Ipod classic, Ipod nano, Ipod touch, Ipod Shuffle etc. Yeh, zune outpaces them individually (which is very impressive actually) but come on! The title is wrong, Zune outpaces ipod nano, Zune outpaces Ipod Classic, etc. But zune outpaces Ipod? No
That was the entire point of my post! I was saying, they DONT sell 350k a week, and stating last week's statistic only was misleading as it implies they do.
Look, 1.8million made 1/3 go to US, so 600 000 in the US, 150 000 A week in the US
350 000 sold last week
Now, think about that, if every week they sold 350 000, and they only made 150 000, how did they find the extra 200 000.
Two answers- either they have a stockpile (not likely considering stores have been empty for almsot a year) - OR - they DIDN'T sell 350 000 units in the previous weeks.
Now, could we in future post articles which aren't based on freak statistics and make out those results are normal.
But I love this idea, I really dislike the currenty "portables" with 17" screens, its just like, not at all actually portable, I mean, I'm really surprised that the laptop industry has gone towards bigger laptops, rather than smaller (but that must be what people want right). I really like the idea of an ultra fast PC which is nice and small to use on the go, and the hard drive is PLENTY as long as you have a good sync program on your main PC and sync regularly, and lets face it, someone spending $3200 on a laptop probably will. But of course, $3200 for a "fast" laptop isnt ever a good investment, because the current progression (and the progression for quite a long time) has been too fast to warrant spending that much on what will very quickly become obselete. The main point is, this is an early adopter machine- very nice, but wont be the best by any stretch of the imaginiation.
Yes, becuase it being released in SA rather than VC completely negates my arguement [/sarcasm], and "it wasn't accessible" if it was on the disk and distributed it should have been shown to the ratings board like everything else. And the history of incompetence is the release (over p2p, pirating etc.) of manhunt 2 unmodified. Then the closure of one of their offices and jsut trying to pretend the office never existed etc. Then of course the fact they mis-judged how the BBFC would act in the first place. So yeah, there are screw ups.
I didn't say that i thought the rating was right, I didn't say whether or not censorship is right (as it is, I personally beleive as long as the user is forewarned about the content, anything should be publishable) I was merely saying, rockstar's behaviour within what is the current framework of ratings, not only seems to be a situation of pot calling the kettle black, but that it was doing this in a way to annoy the people who's approval they need. I mean, there's no reason rockstar should've made a comment to the press about this at all.
Smooth, frankly, after rockstar got caught lying to the ratings boards with GTA:VC, they should at the very least be treated very harshly. PLUS who, after rockstar's recent history of incompetence, would start going round attacking the reputation of others? This smacks of the whole childish nature of the company.
It could always be that Harvard successfully keeps a tight leash on their students (ie, you want to continue studying at (one of) the top law schools in the country you keep your head down and get on), and so the few breaking the law in this way isn't enough to cause the RIAA to risk first contact with such a beast of a university.
Lets make up rediculous products, claim a company is working on, and then slag of the company for their behaviour managing the non-existant product that hasn't even been developed.
Slashdot Mirror
I've had enough of this, NO! I don't give a crap about a copyright holder's renumeration. I give a damn about the renumeration of the artist. Just because some bloody monopolistic company has forced artists into joining them or die doesn't mean i should be forced to hand a penny over to these people- They're not providing a service they've just wedged themselves in between the consumer and the artist and have constructed a massive road block, saying to the artists "give us your copyright or no one will hear your music ever" and saying to the consumer "pay us or you'll never be allowed to hear music again"
It really does vary alot- you'll get one or two comments in almost every story, but this story seems to be very popular for trolls. If you want to judge how much trolling goes on, this would not be representative of the norm. Generally though, it's the same sentiments (exactly the same words often) and no doubt coming from the same places.
Just think about it, rather than people like George Bush having to declare war on a region and kill millions of innocent people, they can just drug the nation in to voting for them. Although I suspect rigging the vote again will remain the prefered option- tried and tested, and most probably considerably cheaper.
Why all I see on their website is a picture of a laptop (how the hell could you tell the specs from the outside) and some memory sticks (MMC, USB, and SD) which have been photoshopped(not photoshopped, MS PAINTED) to add 2 or 3 pins, and maybe crop a bit of it here and there, and then super impose a random set of "free megabytes" I mean honestly what the hell is going on- what happened at the show because from the looks of this site he would just be ignored! There's nothing plausible about this at all.
"If you haven't noticed, I'm funny and enjoy having fun. Enjoy my site, tell me if you use my projects. Don't take it too seriously though, it's all an act."
Probably just another FSJ
That's what they said about the armada too :P
My initial reaction was "What the hell, you theiving bastard stealing technology from a non-profit organization" But when you look at it, what difference does it make going out and selling these cheap laptops for profit, firstly the main selling point is gone, and the market is gone, so its just another cheap laptop- all be it with a littl einteresting technology, but nonetheless, atleast here in the UK that market has already been entered (asus eepc) so, betrayal- probably morally rather than contractually (Sp?), good move- probably not actually.
Oh! So you're saying credit card fraud fraud is skyrocketing!
Yeah, that's great, but look at it today and look at the current pattern of development.
Obviously thats just not true of all open source software. However, with some OSS, like Open office, I just can't be bothered, because they're trying to replace closed source software, not making it in their own right, just copying it, no creativity just coding for the sake of it being open source and giving them a warm fuzzy feeling inside. For me, using Open office at the moment is like stepping back to ms office 10 years ago, why would I do that- ms office came with my PC so it hasnt cost me anything (it did, but not directly) and more importantly in businesses the users aren't charged anything- it's just an office expense. The guy does have a point though: it's no longer enough just to be open source, to be accepted you MUST be open source and useful. I think it's a step that was missed when the OSS developers started looking for larger distribution to people who weren't intereseted in computer ethics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloverfield
This truly is poor excuse for an article on slashot, and i mean on epic proportions (although that is getting more often now days). It's like "look, this is advertising, lets give them some free publicity"- its a good way of loosing credibility very fast
So you want microsoft to not support those 'web designers' who have gone out of their way to support microsoft's browser in the past by writing customized non-compliant code just to work with microsoft.
Actually, it doesnt sound that unlikely.
With text and facts wikipedia sites places where it got the information as a resource to prove what is written is true, or they state when they can't site the source. Now with mathematical equations the source is the proof, so it doesn't make any sense not to state how it was proven. However, that being said, some proofs are very long and often people don't want to see them, so possibly put the proofs as a separate page (like clicking on an image to see it at higher quality) See what I've written, its called continuity in policy and I think it's the only way for wikipedia to gain/retain their credibility as a source for mathematics.
The old stuff, every time. My reasoning, even though it is old, it is by the same companies, so presumably the newer software is a logical progression on their features, so even though it'll be different, when the people you are teaching encounter the new stuff they'll have a basic understanding of the purpose of the programming, how the particular coders work and the step up shouldn't be too hard. Think of it like this, it's easier to learn italian when you know latin than when you know English.
However you do have to decide whether you value educating people to use software that you think is ethically better over the small difference in the relevance. I personally would find myself as a teaching deciding to use the old software as that's what I think will give the best education, but each to their own.
But 1 type of zune vs. Ipod classic, Ipod nano, Ipod touch, Ipod Shuffle etc. Yeh, zune outpaces them individually (which is very impressive actually) but come on! The title is wrong, Zune outpaces ipod nano, Zune outpaces Ipod Classic, etc. But zune outpaces Ipod? No
That was the entire point of my post! I was saying, they DONT sell 350k a week, and stating last week's statistic only was misleading as it implies they do.
Look, 1.8million made 1/3 go to US, so 600 000 in the US, 150 000 A week in the US
350 000 sold last week
Now, think about that, if every week they sold 350 000, and they only made 150 000, how did they find the extra 200 000.
Two answers- either they have a stockpile (not likely considering stores have been empty for almsot a year) - OR - they DIDN'T sell 350 000 units in the previous weeks.
Now, could we in future post articles which aren't based on freak statistics and make out those results are normal.
But I love this idea, I really dislike the currenty "portables" with 17" screens, its just like, not at all actually portable, I mean, I'm really surprised that the laptop industry has gone towards bigger laptops, rather than smaller (but that must be what people want right). I really like the idea of an ultra fast PC which is nice and small to use on the go, and the hard drive is PLENTY as long as you have a good sync program on your main PC and sync regularly, and lets face it, someone spending $3200 on a laptop probably will. But of course, $3200 for a "fast" laptop isnt ever a good investment, because the current progression (and the progression for quite a long time) has been too fast to warrant spending that much on what will very quickly become obselete. The main point is, this is an early adopter machine- very nice, but wont be the best by any stretch of the imaginiation.
Yes, becuase it being released in SA rather than VC completely negates my arguement [/sarcasm], and "it wasn't accessible" if it was on the disk and distributed it should have been shown to the ratings board like everything else. And the history of incompetence is the release (over p2p, pirating etc.) of manhunt 2 unmodified. Then the closure of one of their offices and jsut trying to pretend the office never existed etc. Then of course the fact they mis-judged how the BBFC would act in the first place. So yeah, there are screw ups.
I didn't say that i thought the rating was right, I didn't say whether or not censorship is right (as it is, I personally beleive as long as the user is forewarned about the content, anything should be publishable) I was merely saying, rockstar's behaviour within what is the current framework of ratings, not only seems to be a situation of pot calling the kettle black, but that it was doing this in a way to annoy the people who's approval they need. I mean, there's no reason rockstar should've made a comment to the press about this at all.
Smooth, frankly, after rockstar got caught lying to the ratings boards with GTA:VC, they should at the very least be treated very harshly. PLUS who, after rockstar's recent history of incompetence, would start going round attacking the reputation of others? This smacks of the whole childish nature of the company.
It could always be that Harvard successfully keeps a tight leash on their students (ie, you want to continue studying at (one of) the top law schools in the country you keep your head down and get on), and so the few breaking the law in this way isn't enough to cause the RIAA to risk first contact with such a beast of a university.
But Edison electrocuted an elephant, which quite frankly is just an awesome smear campaign.
Lets make up rediculous products, claim a company is working on, and then slag of the company for their behaviour managing the non-existant product that hasn't even been developed.
Surely, by them starting a fund for dissidents, they are effectively aiding and abetting dissidents, how will that not get china attacking htem?