...at least on/., that we will always have the ability to record mp3's and that M$ is pretty much shooting itself in the foot here. But I think the larger key of this article is this line:
apparently because of changes Microsoft made to how data are written on CD-ROMs under Windows XP
So what their saying is that M$ is beginning to make the move to microsoft only cd-roms. Again flaunting standards in order to limit the end-user from using products effectively. It won't be long before cd's have to be formatted especially for MS. It's allready happening. I was seriously irritated when I found that the HP CD_RW came with software that had no capability to image an iso to a disk. I shouldn't have to go get new software to do that. However, the software was capaple of burning cd's that could only be read by Windows. Indeed it's the primary option. It just gets more and more frustrating over the years and companies try to force their standards on the consumer.
Pornography is indistinguishable from rape. It runs women through a blender, converting their bodies into liquified youth. There is no such thing as consent in pornography, because every person involved is there because of dire economic need. But we tolerate women's public humiliation and public rape, because men universally crave and devour pornography.
Apparently there's no such thing as consent in a world that you run. You get to dictate everyone's behavior. Besides the fact that your claim is ridiculous. There's plenty of jobs out there that don't involve pornography, these women (and men) like the money and have fun doing it. And no one universally does anything all people are different.
How can Yahoo justify profiting from such exploitation? I understand Yahoo's stock prices are slipping and they're desperate to pump some new revenue sources, but pornography is unconscienable. Every dollar Yahoo makes is now tainted with the blood and tears of exploited women.
Yes because all women in porn are beaten severly after each shoot. It's a blood bath. You can hardly walk from all the blood and tears. Especially the women at strip clubs. Not a time goes buy where I don't see a stripper crying and bleeding as she's counting the wad of cash in her garter. Especially the one who enjoy the exhibitionism. They're the most exploited of all. How dare they do something that they enjoy and make money at it.
This calls for a boycott. This calls for a public outcry. There is no excuse for sitting by the sidelines and watching the world go by. Everyone who does not actively oppose this move is complicit in human suffering.
I actively enjoy it. but my usual reaction isn't suffering, in fact quite the opposite. When I set down with some porn I usually really, REALLY happy.
The Ten Commandments tell us, "Thou shalt not rape!" The Bible also tells us to love our neighbors as ourselves. Yahoo fails.
Uhhh no it doesn't. Unless maybe that was on a tablet moses dropped on the way down the mountain.
And I must say that porn definitley inspires love in most people I know that come in contact with it. I LOVE Miss November.
The need to exploit others for profit is a pervasive one in our society, but it's not one that we can't arrest as we arrest other criminal passions. The free market cannot thrive unless we police it for criminal activity such as this, just as it cannot thrive unless we police the market square for pickpockets.
And of course we'll let people like you decide what is or is not criminal. The free market cannot thrive unless we DO NOT police it. Otherwise it's not so much free is it?
Pornography kills women's souls. Pornography burns men's souls. There is no victor here, except for the ugly head of capitalism. Yahoo must not be allowed to perpetuate this abomination against humanity.
Hmmm I thought souls were immortal. And I must say I certainly feel like taking a victory lap right after a night at the nudie bar.
"Shit, I'm not carrying all these stone tablets down this damn mountain, some of these have to go, otherwise I'll be too tired to look at porn" -- Moses
Uhh that's just dumb. If it is negligent for the tree to be to close to the road, you cannot remove the right for someone to sue. And if it's not negligent then they can't sue anyway.
Besides you're assuming serveral premises that aren't true.
First you're making unsubstantiated assumptions. It may be the case that if the seatbelt WAS worn it could have resulted in more serious injury. There is no way to prove one way or the other that the seatbelt would have helped or hindered. Even with a strong inductive argument ABOUT THAT ONE PARTICULAR CASE. A driver has no foreknowledge that a seatbelt would help or not. Therefore he is justified in making whatever choice he feels the safest.
I certainly don't condone rampant law suits, especially when they are definitley aren't warranted. But your argument makes no sense.
Actually I'd go so far as to say that there is always an exception. Regardless. In my opinion censorship is WRONG. Plain and simple.
Back to the children real quick. Who defines what abuse is? I'm not talking about physical injury. If I decide as a parent that my child should be allowed to wath sex and violence, that's my right as a parent. It's an ethical decision that I make. And it's not for anyone else to butt in.
I know it's a troll... but I just...can't...help...ut:
Not every American is a red neck and quite frankly I find it hard to believe that people in Europe don't have people of that class
Yes and then Britain's video game ecperience will be as exciting as their culinary experience.
and in my opinion only a culture as bankrupt as the USA's could have spawned such unspeakable filth.
Yes only American culture spawns filth (you're word not mine).
New from the country that brought us Monty Python, and a tremendous fat man puking everywhere and blowing up, and such wonderfully non-vioelent files such as Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels.... CULTURAL VALUES. Call now for your free copy of "This British dudes anal retentive, holy than thou Morality" and you too can learn to talk like you are a superior person with a stick up his ass. Learn to blame all the problems of you country on video games from other countries....
Hmmm spying.. that word only applies tenuously to the situation. We were in International airspace. The transmissions we pick up in that area are the equivalent of talking in public.
A government for the people, by the people, who doesn't care about the people....
Your statement is weak and misguided. Our government has to do what's best for all people not just these particular people. The greatest good for the greatest number. Showing no backbone endangers the fututre of the entire country, not just these 24 people. It also lets other countries know that they can take hostages and the US will capitulate to get them back, wich leads to even more hostages being taken.
Especially since it's likely that the chinese government already has the downed pilot. He's tucked away temporarily in a government building somewhere waiting for the situation to be resolved. He;ll probably get a medal for creating a situation where the Chinese government can demand that the US abase itself and apologize for an incident that was not it's fault.
Patriotism aside, it is also possible, howver small the likelihood that the US was at fault.
Not that any of these thoughts are strictly impossible, but the burden of proof would be on you... not those that believe that what you say is not so. Making unsubstantiated claims and calling them true is ridiculous. Of course, most of your silly little fantasies revolve around solispism which I believe at some point was shown to be false. Or at least insomuch as anything of that nature can be proven.
Of course this all is probably an attempt at humor.
I was just impressed at the attention to detail in the first episode. You could see Scheme code in one of the background windows of one of the machines.
No that was not my mistake. Read first and then respond. I said maybe it would have been different had I not been held back by other students. I could do graduate level work when I entered college. Of course professors may have something to teach anyone, then again they may not. It's professors who write the books. The information is out there. As far as who is smarter, who knows, all I know is that I breezed through every class without paying any attention.
If you want a job when you get out of school go to a trade school. A University should be training course preparing you for study. It is not a technical school. I don't need literature courses, I have a firm background in that area, as well as history. And yet I was forced to sit through boring classes as if I'd never read and was unaware of the culture of this country, or for that matter the world. You can know more make the blanket statement that school is needed for everyone thatn I can say that it isn't.
I'm not saying that teachers are useless, but they are not necessary for everyone. I never needed college except for that piece of paper. It's not so much wasting money, when I have to have it. I don't go to class, except to turn things in and take tests, and yet my grades are good, better than good in Computer Science. I'm not going to sit in a class and listen to information that I already know because a professor has to appeal to the avergage level of knowledge of a group. I can learn more on my own. Now if I was going to a class where it was just a professor and me, that would be a different story. If I were allowed to go at my pace instead of the dullards that sit in COSC classes because they think they'll make a lot of money, I would have been much happier in school. But the simple fact is I never needed a professor. I could converse with them on their level, I could converse with them on their level as a senior, and I can converse with them on their level now. Your mistake, and many others, is assuming that all professors are omniscient in their discipline. This is not nearly the case and I've proven it time and time again.
Good it's rediculous that I was forced to take crap classes to make me a well rounded college student. I was well rounded before I got there. I went to university to learn Computer Science. Of course it turns out that I learned nothing from that program either, but at least I don't feel like I'm being suckered from my money.
Yes and a professor can sound very authentic and correct and yet be totally wrong. What's your point? I disagree that any idiot can learn from a text. But there are people who can. There are people who are bored in a classroom situation, and learn more from books. This is not to say that it's not nice to have someone to ask questions of, but that doesn't have to be a professor. The entire education system is bogus, the only reason I'm there is to get that piece of paper.
Actually I believe it's the other way around. Proprietary zealots tend not to be able to grasp the fact that something that you don't have to pay for or are allowed to see how it works is bad. It's funny that something as "trivial" as Apache could corner the market in web servers. And Netscape while I agree that it is not the greatest piece of code is no worse the IE, it's only real competitor. Especially considering the security flaws that riddle Explorer. Not to mention the fact that in a arena where everyone is trying to shove their own stadards down everyone elses throat, it's nearly impossible to make a perfect product.
Let's go back to the concept of trivialness. How do you know that these proprietary products aren't also trivial (definitely you ridiculous adjective)... have you seen the code for any of these products? If OSS products are so trivial why do they dominate the server world. Why do the people who now the technology best flock to them?
I never said that OSS is universally better than proprietary, although it is morally if not for quality reasons. I said it was traditionally better. There are just as many poor, (actually more) poorly written proprietary apps than there are poorly written OSS apps. Just scan a download gateway and look at all of the crap that people have written
OSS "zealots" can more accurately assess the quality of software. For one they know how the software works, and they can modify it to suit their needs. It's the closed source zealots who have a problem judging quality, they're trapped in their box of constant upgrades to keep up with bloated software that constantly crashes. They can change their software, they have to believe that their software is better, because they have no other choice. It's sad, the question "where do you want to go today?" is most often answered by, to go get a cup of coffee while I reboot my machine for the second time today.
While XP really has nothing to do with OSS your statement
Open source doesn't seem to work any better than closed, and nobody is making any real money at it. So if it's not better, and makes less money... well you can finish that thought
Is blatantly false. It's actually nearly impossible to make the claim that one is better than the other. It depends on your criteria. From a technical standpoint OSS has traditionally provided a better quality of software in which bugs are fixed more quickly. Not to mention the fact that you are free to modify it any way you'd like. So from my criteria, freedom, power, and quality I'd say the reverse. Now if your criteria is rigidness, less rights, and a lot less power. Then yeah, closed source is better. As for the issue of making money, hell that's not even a factor in my book, but just to make a point there are plenty of companies that do make money at OSS.
One other vitally important point. All software is open source in the situation you've described. No not in the sense that the source is available to anyone who wants it... but the developers, which could be anyone in the case of OSS, or the employees in the case of a proprietary company have access to the source code. So it's not reallly closed is it? Not insomuch as it pertains to development.
So basically you're pretty much wrong on all counts. Collaboration has EVERYTHING to do with open source... it's not possible without open source. (Except of course in the extreme, no pun intended, case that each programmer writes a subroutine and "owns" that bit of code, which is assembled into the whole by someone else.
Just because a corporation is invoking IP law doesn't make them evil.
It does when you don't believe in IP law.
Besides, personally I don't care if two names can be confused. You have registered a name as a trademark, not a regular expression. If these big bad companies want to be sure no one uses a name that comes close let them spend the money on buying as many misspellings and permutations as they are willing to pay for. Ridiculous, yes, but not as ridiculous as telling someone that they cannot use a particular sequence of letters because some company owns it.
I have a laptop with a freebsd that can rebuild itself from scratch. And I develop device drivers in my bed. Maybe not everyone definition of fun, but its mine
Certainly part of my definition... It's starting to sound like if I want to spend more time hacking OS code instead of looking for OS code to hack... FreeBSD may be the way to go... If I can get that nvidia chip running (not that I've got it running under Linux right now) I may be playing with it this weekend. Of course, my subscription to Linux Jounrnal becomes a little less useful.
Slashdot Mirror
apparently because of changes Microsoft made to how data are written on CD-ROMs under Windows XP
So what their saying is that M$ is beginning to make the move to microsoft only cd-roms. Again flaunting standards in order to limit the end-user from using products effectively. It won't be long before cd's have to be formatted especially for MS. It's allready happening. I was seriously irritated when I found that the HP CD_RW came with software that had no capability to image an iso to a disk. I shouldn't have to go get new software to do that. However, the software was capaple of burning cd's that could only be read by Windows. Indeed it's the primary option. It just gets more and more frustrating over the years and companies try to force their standards on the consumer.
Pornography is indistinguishable from rape. It runs women through a blender, converting their bodies into liquified youth. There is no such thing as consent in pornography, because every person involved is there because of dire economic need. But we tolerate women's public humiliation and public rape, because men universally crave and devour pornography.
Apparently there's no such thing as consent in a world that you run. You get to dictate everyone's behavior. Besides the fact that your claim is ridiculous. There's plenty of jobs out there that don't involve pornography, these women (and men) like the money and have fun doing it. And no one universally does anything all people are different.
How can Yahoo justify profiting from such exploitation? I understand Yahoo's stock prices are slipping and they're desperate to pump some new revenue sources, but pornography is unconscienable. Every dollar Yahoo makes is now tainted with the blood and tears of exploited women.
Yes because all women in porn are beaten severly after each shoot. It's a blood bath. You can hardly walk from all the blood and tears. Especially the women at strip clubs. Not a time goes buy where I don't see a stripper crying and bleeding as she's counting the wad of cash in her garter. Especially the one who enjoy the exhibitionism. They're the most exploited of all. How dare they do something that they enjoy and make money at it.
This calls for a boycott. This calls for a public outcry. There is no excuse for sitting by the sidelines and watching the world go by. Everyone who does not actively oppose this move is complicit in human suffering.
I actively enjoy it. but my usual reaction isn't suffering, in fact quite the opposite. When I set down with some porn I usually really, REALLY happy.
The Ten Commandments tell us, "Thou shalt not rape!" The Bible also tells us to love our neighbors as ourselves. Yahoo fails.
Uhhh no it doesn't. Unless maybe that was on a tablet moses dropped on the way down the mountain. And I must say that porn definitley inspires love in most people I know that come in contact with it. I LOVE Miss November.
The need to exploit others for profit is a pervasive one in our society, but it's not one that we can't arrest as we arrest other criminal passions. The free market cannot thrive unless we police it for criminal activity such as this, just as it cannot thrive unless we police the market square for pickpockets.
And of course we'll let people like you decide what is or is not criminal. The free market cannot thrive unless we DO NOT police it. Otherwise it's not so much free is it?
Pornography kills women's souls. Pornography burns men's souls. There is no victor here, except for the ugly head of capitalism. Yahoo must not be allowed to perpetuate this abomination against humanity.
Hmmm I thought souls were immortal. And I must say I certainly feel like taking a victory lap right after a night at the nudie bar.
"Shit, I'm not carrying all these stone tablets down this damn mountain, some of these have to go, otherwise I'll be too tired to look at porn" -- Moses
Besides you're assuming serveral premises that aren't true.
First you're making unsubstantiated assumptions. It may be the case that if the seatbelt WAS worn it could have resulted in more serious injury. There is no way to prove one way or the other that the seatbelt would have helped or hindered. Even with a strong inductive argument ABOUT THAT ONE PARTICULAR CASE. A driver has no foreknowledge that a seatbelt would help or not. Therefore he is justified in making whatever choice he feels the safest.
I certainly don't condone rampant law suits, especially when they are definitley aren't warranted. But your argument makes no sense.
Back to the children real quick. Who defines what abuse is? I'm not talking about physical injury. If I decide as a parent that my child should be allowed to wath sex and violence, that's my right as a parent. It's an ethical decision that I make. And it's not for anyone else to butt in.
The only one who have a right to fight for the children are the parents of those children.
Oh and BTW about your sig. If God DIDN'T intend for us to fly, he wouldn't have given us the power to invent flight.
Not every American is a red neck and quite frankly I find it hard to believe that people in Europe don't have people of that class Yes and then Britain's video game ecperience will be as exciting as their culinary experience.
and in my opinion only a culture as bankrupt as the USA's could have spawned such unspeakable filth.
Yes only American culture spawns filth (you're word not mine). New from the country that brought us Monty Python, and a tremendous fat man puking everywhere and blowing up, and such wonderfully non-vioelent files such as Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels.... CULTURAL VALUES. Call now for your free copy of "This British dudes anal retentive, holy than thou Morality" and you too can learn to talk like you are a superior person with a stick up his ass. Learn to blame all the problems of you country on video games from other countries....
Silly rabbit. That's because it kept crashing.
Just giving you crap . Although technically there is a difference between defensive and defens in newspeak.
Ouch! Not to bright in the first place was he?
Hmmm spying.. that word only applies tenuously to the situation. We were in International airspace. The transmissions we pick up in that area are the equivalent of talking in public.
Your statement is weak and misguided. Our government has to do what's best for all people not just these particular people. The greatest good for the greatest number. Showing no backbone endangers the fututre of the entire country, not just these 24 people. It also lets other countries know that they can take hostages and the US will capitulate to get them back, wich leads to even more hostages being taken.
to build defensive systems to use in attacking us Hmmm build DEFENSIVE systems to use in ATTACKING us.... I'd like to see that one.
Patriotism aside, it is also possible, howver small the likelihood that the US was at fault.
Of course this all is probably an attempt at humor.
Not to mention that he said he did not wnat to carry his notebook around.
I was just impressed at the attention to detail in the first episode. You could see Scheme code in one of the background windows of one of the machines.
If you wasted your time, that doesn't mean that you failed in the education system. You could have done everything on your own like many others.
If you want a job when you get out of school go to a trade school. A University should be training course preparing you for study. It is not a technical school. I don't need literature courses, I have a firm background in that area, as well as history. And yet I was forced to sit through boring classes as if I'd never read and was unaware of the culture of this country, or for that matter the world. You can know more make the blanket statement that school is needed for everyone thatn I can say that it isn't.
I'm not saying that teachers are useless, but they are not necessary for everyone. I never needed college except for that piece of paper. It's not so much wasting money, when I have to have it. I don't go to class, except to turn things in and take tests, and yet my grades are good, better than good in Computer Science. I'm not going to sit in a class and listen to information that I already know because a professor has to appeal to the avergage level of knowledge of a group. I can learn more on my own. Now if I was going to a class where it was just a professor and me, that would be a different story. If I were allowed to go at my pace instead of the dullards that sit in COSC classes because they think they'll make a lot of money, I would have been much happier in school. But the simple fact is I never needed a professor. I could converse with them on their level, I could converse with them on their level as a senior, and I can converse with them on their level now. Your mistake, and many others, is assuming that all professors are omniscient in their discipline. This is not nearly the case and I've proven it time and time again.
Good it's rediculous that I was forced to take crap classes to make me a well rounded college student. I was well rounded before I got there. I went to university to learn Computer Science. Of course it turns out that I learned nothing from that program either, but at least I don't feel like I'm being suckered from my money.
Yes and a professor can sound very authentic and correct and yet be totally wrong. What's your point? I disagree that any idiot can learn from a text. But there are people who can. There are people who are bored in a classroom situation, and learn more from books. This is not to say that it's not nice to have someone to ask questions of, but that doesn't have to be a professor. The entire education system is bogus, the only reason I'm there is to get that piece of paper.
Let's go back to the concept of trivialness. How do you know that these proprietary products aren't also trivial (definitely you ridiculous adjective)... have you seen the code for any of these products? If OSS products are so trivial why do they dominate the server world. Why do the people who now the technology best flock to them?
I never said that OSS is universally better than proprietary, although it is morally if not for quality reasons. I said it was traditionally better. There are just as many poor, (actually more) poorly written proprietary apps than there are poorly written OSS apps. Just scan a download gateway and look at all of the crap that people have written
OSS "zealots" can more accurately assess the quality of software. For one they know how the software works, and they can modify it to suit their needs. It's the closed source zealots who have a problem judging quality, they're trapped in their box of constant upgrades to keep up with bloated software that constantly crashes. They can change their software, they have to believe that their software is better, because they have no other choice. It's sad, the question "where do you want to go today?" is most often answered by, to go get a cup of coffee while I reboot my machine for the second time today.
Open source doesn't seem to work any better than closed, and nobody is making any real money at it. So if it's not better, and makes less money... well you can finish that thought
Is blatantly false. It's actually nearly impossible to make the claim that one is better than the other. It depends on your criteria. From a technical standpoint OSS has traditionally provided a better quality of software in which bugs are fixed more quickly. Not to mention the fact that you are free to modify it any way you'd like. So from my criteria, freedom, power, and quality I'd say the reverse. Now if your criteria is rigidness, less rights, and a lot less power. Then yeah, closed source is better. As for the issue of making money, hell that's not even a factor in my book, but just to make a point there are plenty of companies that do make money at OSS.
One other vitally important point. All software is open source in the situation you've described. No not in the sense that the source is available to anyone who wants it... but the developers, which could be anyone in the case of OSS, or the employees in the case of a proprietary company have access to the source code. So it's not reallly closed is it? Not insomuch as it pertains to development.
So basically you're pretty much wrong on all counts. Collaboration has EVERYTHING to do with open source... it's not possible without open source. (Except of course in the extreme, no pun intended, case that each programmer writes a subroutine and "owns" that bit of code, which is assembled into the whole by someone else.
It does when you don't believe in IP law.
Besides, personally I don't care if two names can be confused. You have registered a name as a trademark, not a regular expression. If these big bad companies want to be sure no one uses a name that comes close let them spend the money on buying as many misspellings and permutations as they are willing to pay for. Ridiculous, yes, but not as ridiculous as telling someone that they cannot use a particular sequence of letters because some company owns it.
I have a laptop with a freebsd that can rebuild itself from scratch. And I develop device drivers in my bed. Maybe not everyone definition of fun, but its mine
Certainly part of my definition... It's starting to sound like if I want to spend more time hacking OS code instead of looking for OS code to hack... FreeBSD may be the way to go... If I can get that nvidia chip running (not that I've got it running under Linux right now) I may be playing with it this weekend. Of course, my subscription to Linux Jounrnal becomes a little less useful.