"the degree of higher price for better quality is much greater than would be justified by the cost of the components. The wealthy aren't selecting these brand items solely for better quality. They are doing it to identify themselves to the other members of their class."
How can you make such a blanket statement? An object/product's worth is such a personal/relative concept. I'm sure the "social status" that comes with Apple products plays a role for some people, but most people couldn't care less about how the thing looks as long as it works, every time, no exceptions. Why do you think I bought a macbook pro after using ubuntu full time for two years on my dell laptop? I was sick of battling for things like suspend-to-ram, flash stability, having sound in more than 1 application simultaneously, etc* and I sure as hell wasn't going to give Microsoft another dime.
Another thing one has to remember is that when comparing Apple machines to linux/windows machines, one cannot simply look at hardware specs. One must also look at the software bundled with or intended to be used with the hardware. âWhen I shut the lid of my laptop, it goes to sleep. When I open it, it wakes up. Every time. Without fail. Imagine that. I absolutely value the "quality" enough to pay an extra $3-400 for my computer, and if that irritates you, sorry.
Just drop the whole "holier than thou because I'm different than the blatantly wrong stereotype of mac users that I have created in my head" thing.
*I am aware these problems are the fault of hardware vendors & adobe having awful linux support, and have appropriately changed the vendors from whom I purchase hardware/software.
Having been born and raised in Las Vegas, this type of service seems quite unnecessary in this town. After all, everyone knows where "the wild things are happening" here.
Unfortunately I don't think this will happen. With a discovery of this magnitude, the government will surely regulate it. Markets for blood & organs should be opened up so people can buy and sell them instead of having to rely on donors. What right does the government have of preventing me from selling one of my kidneys or similar?
The question is whether it's just for the government to enforce "ethical" or "moral" behavior that doesn't directly harm others. Examples include bidding on one's own auctions, lying, and cheating on one's spouse.
Wow, TIME Magazine must be running short on good content. They interviewed the creator of a 600-member facebook group? There's more members in the National Chipotle Day group. Come on.
Yeah, the GUI would be 10 times better because it wouldn't use that awful windows launcher/taskbar/system tray model. Don't get me wrong: I love linux. I just hate the whole launcher/taskbar/system tray thing.
"Key points for interpreting leetspeek
Foster open communication. Your first step in understanding the way your children communicate should be to ask them. It's never too early to encourage healthy communication with your children about all aspects of computer usage."
I can just imagine my parents asking me when I was growing up: "Honey, we'd like to learn more about leetspeak." I'd have responded: "wtf lol noobs? headshot"
I also have never seen POS used to mean "parents over shoulder." Perhaps it's because we are both above the age of 12? Additionally, if one's parents really were over one's shoulder, would they not ask what "POS" (or any the other ridiculous acronyms) means when they see it written to the AIM buddy of choice?
The "20 Acronyms" article seems to be a bit inflammatory to me. The first five acronyms (none of which I have ever seen before) are all used to warn AIM buddies that one's parents are watching/listening/in the room/somehow able to see what one is doing. This seems to imply to parents that their children hide IM conversations from them because of questionable content. Most of the other acronyms involve trying to get personal information from someone or sexual activity of some form. IWSN? Give me a break... Do twelve-year-olds just go into msn chat rooms and say that? NALOPKT? What the hell? Do people reveal intimately personal information on the internet so often that an acronym developed in order to make it more efficient?
I think the point is that merely owning a gun does not violate the rights of others, and therefore it is unjust for the government to prevent people from doing so. The same goes for cars, knives, baseball bats, and basically anything else one could potentially use to hurt someone. When one begins to use the item to hurt others it is then the government's responsibility to prevent him/her from doing further damage. It is not the fault of the item but of the person wielding it, and therefore it is unjust to prevent the rest of us from owning that item when we are not using it to harm others.
Some of these include airline deregulation, multiple governmental agencies with no central oversight or responsibility, multiple corporate entities with conflicting agendas If only we had more government regulation and involvement in the airline industry! It would run so much more smoothly and be so much better overall, just like what happens to everything else when the government gets involved. Examples: retirement (Social Security), health care (Medicare/medicaid), insurance (Louisiana/Katrina), education (self explanatory), economic growth (Carter Administration/1970s in general), and combating poverty (welfare).
Advocates of freedom and free market forces are generally in favor of regulating abusive monopolies because monopolies restrain the free market from operating to its full potential. Linguistically, a monopoly is by definition not subject to the regular forces of the competitive free market, and thus a government seeking to maximize freedom would legitimately regulate it. The problem is when people say "I don't like this particular practice of this company even though it's a voluntary relationship, so I'm going to try to get the government to use force or the threat of force to stop them."
Especially true since the majority of people on twitter are dumbass twelve-year-olds*.
*I have no idea if this is true. "Dumbass twelve-year-olds" is simply a catch-all category for people who are either a) too young to vote or b) not going to vote anyway because they're too busy on twitter.
Every time I have to deal with one of those telephone voice recognition systems, it's always a huge pain. They never get anything I say right, and I have no accent at all (I'm a home-grown West Coast male). Usually I just say "agent" and eventually it connects me to a human being. It's much easier to talk to the Indian support representatives who have extremely heavy accents.
Slashdot Mirror
"the degree of higher price for better quality is much greater than would be justified by the cost of the components. The wealthy aren't selecting these brand items solely for better quality. They are doing it to identify themselves to the other members of their class." How can you make such a blanket statement? An object/product's worth is such a personal/relative concept. I'm sure the "social status" that comes with Apple products plays a role for some people, but most people couldn't care less about how the thing looks as long as it works, every time, no exceptions. Why do you think I bought a macbook pro after using ubuntu full time for two years on my dell laptop? I was sick of battling for things like suspend-to-ram, flash stability, having sound in more than 1 application simultaneously, etc* and I sure as hell wasn't going to give Microsoft another dime.
Another thing one has to remember is that when comparing Apple machines to linux/windows machines, one cannot simply look at hardware specs. One must also look at the software bundled with or intended to be used with the hardware. âWhen I shut the lid of my laptop, it goes to sleep. When I open it, it wakes up. Every time. Without fail. Imagine that. I absolutely value the "quality" enough to pay an extra $3-400 for my computer, and if that irritates you, sorry.
Just drop the whole "holier than thou because I'm different than the blatantly wrong stereotype of mac users that I have created in my head" thing. *I am aware these problems are the fault of hardware vendors & adobe having awful linux support, and have appropriately changed the vendors from whom I purchase hardware/software.
"I don't mean plugins, but a standard." It's hard to have standards that are easy to conform to when they're proprietary, like flash.
Hey, as long as Microsoft isn't part of the "Allied Security Trust" it's fine with me. The only company in there I don't like is Verizon.
Having been born and raised in Las Vegas, this type of service seems quite unnecessary in this town. After all, everyone knows where "the wild things are happening" here.
Sounds like Microsoft.
Unfortunately I don't think this will happen. With a discovery of this magnitude, the government will surely regulate it. Markets for blood & organs should be opened up so people can buy and sell them instead of having to rely on donors. What right does the government have of preventing me from selling one of my kidneys or similar?
The question is whether it's just for the government to enforce "ethical" or "moral" behavior that doesn't directly harm others. Examples include bidding on one's own auctions, lying, and cheating on one's spouse.
Wow, TIME Magazine must be running short on good content. They interviewed the creator of a 600-member facebook group? There's more members in the National Chipotle Day group. Come on.
Yeah, the GUI would be 10 times better because it wouldn't use that awful windows launcher/taskbar/system tray model. Don't get me wrong: I love linux. I just hate the whole launcher/taskbar/system tray thing.
Every time I heard the word "Orbitz" I think of that maddox article. It's so funny.
Gnash has worked wonderfully on my ubuntu system for the past few months.
Awesome link.
"Key points for interpreting leetspeek
Foster open communication. Your first step in understanding the way your children communicate should be to ask them. It's never too early to encourage healthy communication with your children about all aspects of computer usage."
I can just imagine my parents asking me when I was growing up: "Honey, we'd like to learn more about leetspeak." I'd have responded: "wtf lol noobs? headshot"
I also have never seen POS used to mean "parents over shoulder." Perhaps it's because we are both above the age of 12? Additionally, if one's parents really were over one's shoulder, would they not ask what "POS" (or any the other ridiculous acronyms) means when they see it written to the AIM buddy of choice?
The "20 Acronyms" article seems to be a bit inflammatory to me. The first five acronyms (none of which I have ever seen before) are all used to warn AIM buddies that one's parents are watching/listening/in the room/somehow able to see what one is doing. This seems to imply to parents that their children hide IM conversations from them because of questionable content. Most of the other acronyms involve trying to get personal information from someone or sexual activity of some form. IWSN? Give me a break... Do twelve-year-olds just go into msn chat rooms and say that? NALOPKT? What the hell? Do people reveal intimately personal information on the internet so often that an acronym developed in order to make it more efficient?
How about Point-of-Sale? That's a really common one in the retail industry. http://www.google.com/search?q=pos+products
Sounds sort of like that ridiculous movie "Red Planet" with Carrie-Anne Moss. "I can breathe!!"
I think the point is that merely owning a gun does not violate the rights of others, and therefore it is unjust for the government to prevent people from doing so. The same goes for cars, knives, baseball bats, and basically anything else one could potentially use to hurt someone. When one begins to use the item to hurt others it is then the government's responsibility to prevent him/her from doing further damage. It is not the fault of the item but of the person wielding it, and therefore it is unjust to prevent the rest of us from owning that item when we are not using it to harm others.
Hypocrisy? Not for us: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian
You mean in addition to the ones they already carry, regardless of the law?
Advocates of freedom and free market forces are generally in favor of regulating abusive monopolies because monopolies restrain the free market from operating to its full potential. Linguistically, a monopoly is by definition not subject to the regular forces of the competitive free market, and thus a government seeking to maximize freedom would legitimately regulate it.
The problem is when people say "I don't like this particular practice of this company even though it's a voluntary relationship, so I'm going to try to get the government to use force or the threat of force to stop them."
Especially true since the majority of people on twitter are dumbass twelve-year-olds*. *I have no idea if this is true. "Dumbass twelve-year-olds" is simply a catch-all category for people who are either a) too young to vote or b) not going to vote anyway because they're too busy on twitter.
Every time I have to deal with one of those telephone voice recognition systems, it's always a huge pain. They never get anything I say right, and I have no accent at all (I'm a home-grown West Coast male). Usually I just say "agent" and eventually it connects me to a human being. It's much easier to talk to the Indian support representatives who have extremely heavy accents.
You're a braver man (I assume) than I. Perhaps it's because I'm from Las Vegas and live there when I'm not at school in Chicago.
Does anyone actually use hotmail anymore? If so, does anyone that knows enough to use firefox still use hotmail?
Solution: switch to a decent email service.