If money from the real world gets involved, that destroys the fantasy because not everyone will be on an equal footing when they start out.
They're not on equal footing now. Not everyone has dozens of real world hours to dedicate to the game. That's why I don't play. How is having tons of time different from having tons of money?
That's true, but on the other hand, if you're 'supposed' to know something, ie, it falls somewhere within your domain, and you don't know it, just say you've done some work with it in the past. Then hit the bookstore. Don't pass yourself off as an expert when you're not, but don't admit knowledge holes so readily, especially when you later find out that just a few hours reading up will bring you up to speed. It looks bad.
Yeah, but this is not a car. These are digital crimes we're talking about here, not flesh and blood or real property! Can't you people see yet which ones are more important!
The parable here is this: the RIAA could save a LOT of money by simply sending a letter to people "caught" file sharing that says "Cut it out, or we'll sue you." I think most of us would be sufficiently scared to curb out practices.
Yes, but first they need to successfully sue some people. A threat isn't worth much if the recipient knows you won't follow through on it. People know they may get caught speeding, and they will get a fine, and demerit points, and lots of hassle, and it's not a pleasant experience. If I get a nastygram from the RIAA, and I know they haven't sued anyone, how is that a deterrant?
Personally I think it's a bunch of paranoia. Like I said, nothing will be bought for you automatically, and if you're drinking with friends you likely have a tab and one bill. It depends on where you are I guess.
That said, I don't think this will make waitstaff's lives any easier. Depending on how it is used it COULD allow a waitress to spend more time on the most profitable customers, ie, big tippers, (the regulars), and only visit the other tables when the 'low beer warning' light goes off (assuming a pager-like device carried by the waitress). Mostly it's just a neat-o gizmo, but I have to say, I would be curious to see a trial run somewhere and what the results are.
Well, common sense tells me that the sensor will signal your server, who will come over and ask if anyone wants another drink. Just because it's RFID doesn't mean it has to be complicated, or track you, or infringe your freedoms, or take money out of your wallet.
That's all most lawyers do. They show up in court, sit for a few hours listening (or not) to the prosecution, and poke little holes in their evidence. That's all you have to do to defend yourself. It is up to the state to make sure all their ducks are lined up and the case is airtight, and your guilt proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
Another agreed -- those were clear answers from people who a) know their stuff and b) clearly understand the audience they're speaking to.
Of course, law, like any technical subject, has people who are considered experts in their field. I urge any intersted/.ers to read some Supreme Court opinions/excerpts (including (or especially) the dissenting ones) on a recent high profile case. To me, the casual observer, the case is often very clear cut, and issues known, etc, etc, and I'm all ready to offer my solutions and opinions on it. But I know shit all about law. Like me trying to explain something, or contribute to a serious discussion about quantum physics. I grasp the general idea, but that's about it, and I'm sure I'd sound like an idiot. So back to the SC. Reading the explanations for their decisions is extremely enlightening. You'll be going like, 'hey, I never thought of that', or 'good point', or, 'hmm, really? damn who knew?' These people obviously more than just know their way around law. They're intimately involved with it on a daily basis. They spend a lot of time thinking about these issues. They understand what's involved. And still they disagree.
It's like kernel design, or CPU architecture. To a casual observer (ie, 99% of/. (no really, I shit you not)), the issues involved seem very simple. 'Why doesn't Linus just put in that patch? X will run 3 times as fast with it!' or 'why doesn't Intel throw another meg of L1 cache on their chips? What are they, dumbasses or something? Don't they know that'll boost performance 200%?' Well, the reality is somewhat more complicated, and experts in the field have their reasons. They're not always right, and it's not like they should not be questioned, but they know a heck of a lot more than you do, and more often than not, it's YOU who's missing something.
I find that too... caffeine definitely has an effect on me, no denying that, but it doesn't prevent me from falling asleep, should I want to sleep. But, an important point, what is the quality of sleep like? I think I get BETTER sleep, and wake up feeling better, if I'm not all wired beforehand.
Microsoft [...] product may be the cheapest and technically best, but it can still be a better purchase to buy from a competitor.
Huh? And why would I do that? That makes no sense at all. If I can get a superior product at a lower price, why on earth would I buy from a competitor? Maybe there ought to be a law against making better products?
I think it's got more potential to integrate granular deliverables, especially in this post-bust economy, but right now MS simply has better core capabilities to enhance transparent web services. Say what?! Can you translate that into English?
What exactly are you doing in your seat on a plane that cameras bother you? There are already cameras watching your every move, put in places where potential for recording an embarassing moment, or expectation of privacy, is far higher than on a plane.
I imagine most of the shots will just have the tops of people's heads sticking over the seats, and stewardesses, as it seems half the time the aisles are blocked by the drink cart anyways.
I don't see why this is such a huge issue. Come to think of it, I'm wondering what took so long to get cameras on flights.
In Canada, English and French officially have the same legal status. This means, all (at least federal) law much be bilingual. What happens when the translations disagree subtly?
The coating used on the blades to make them sharp (titanium?) makes a very sharp edge, but wears out quickly. Your face, while not very hard, dulls edges very effectively. The blades are still sharp, relatively speaking, but not sharp enough for a smooth shave in the 'safety razor' configuration.
Also, pay no attention to the blue strip. Mine wears out almost completely before the week is over, and the razor lasts a good couple of weeks at least.
Yes, but I bet GPL doesn't contradict any of your locally applicable laws. If a licence prohibits reverse engineering (even for compatibility or interoperability), then that part is illegal in a good chunk of the world, US even. I don't see anything in the GPL that is illegal. In any case, GPL is not a EULA; it doesn't apply to USERS.
Microsoft is not going to realize anything, ever. What you are reading coming from MS is marketing. It is meant to influence people. That's the sole purpose, that's what a company does. It's how they make money. This news release was not an accident, nothing that was not meant to be revealed has been revealed. It's all perfectly, 100% calculated to create a specific effect, and I bet it's doing an excellent job so far.
The people running MS, OTOH, have a far better awareness, knowledge and feel of the situation than all of/. readership combined.
You think support wasn't included as part of the MS deal? How is that any different from Linux? Hey, Linux is free, and the support costs are hidden. IBM came in with support to the table, as did MS.
That's such bullshit, and you know it. In most political elections of any importance, you will have 2 (TWO) candidates. You can almost bet they're both far far from your ideal politician. SO what are you gonna do? Vote for the least corrupt one? Not vote? And that's assuming you even KNOW (or CARE) in the first place. People get elected by sheep, not by fully informed voters.
Truth is, if you have lots of money, you're also, sooner or later, neck deep in politics. And if you're in high level politics (above local level) you already ARE (and must be) neck deep in money. Either yours, or someone elses. Don't kid yourself.
(I'll grant you, there are some exceptions, very few to be sure.)
MQ Series is pretty damn cool. It's ancient (and by extension, hardcore) tech.
Basically, you have an app connect to it on one end, send some messages (a message is just a string, encode it however you like). The queue/message server stores these messages, until another app connects to it on the other end (a listener/consumer) and picks up the message.
The idea is that it's standard. Lots of enterprise level stuff can talk to it. There are Perl modules to do it. It's asynchronous (obviously). Has lots of queueing options for different types of uses and scenarios. Well supported.
I guess, sure, you could build your own message server, but it's not exactly a trivial task. People who need these kinds of things know they need them, that's why pages for products like MQ Series seem so vague.
This is just a 'special' deal they give to people who call in to cancel to get them to stay with the service. Better to keep a customer with no margin than lose him to MSN or lose a subscriber from their total of bazillions.
But it doesn't work the same way as IE. For one, you need to install plug-ins again, something that like 90% of the users haven't had to do in years, thanks to activex.
What?!?! All that does is fill the supply chain with merchandise. How much could that possibly be? And if it doesn't sell, retailers will complain, try to return the boxes, try to get a better deal on them, or get MS to do more marketing to move the product.
Slashdot Mirror
They're not on equal footing now. Not everyone has dozens of real world hours to dedicate to the game. That's why I don't play. How is having tons of time different from having tons of money?
That's true, but on the other hand, if you're 'supposed' to know something, ie, it falls somewhere within your domain, and you don't know it, just say you've done some work with it in the past. Then hit the bookstore. Don't pass yourself off as an expert when you're not, but don't admit knowledge holes so readily, especially when you later find out that just a few hours reading up will bring you up to speed. It looks bad.
Yeah, but this is not a car. These are digital crimes we're talking about here, not flesh and blood or real property! Can't you people see yet which ones are more important!
They already kinda do that, by selling practically the same item under different brands or different models.
Yes, but first they need to successfully sue some people. A threat isn't worth much if the recipient knows you won't follow through on it. People know they may get caught speeding, and they will get a fine, and demerit points, and lots of hassle, and it's not a pleasant experience. If I get a nastygram from the RIAA, and I know they haven't sued anyone, how is that a deterrant?
Personally I think it's a bunch of paranoia. Like I said, nothing will be bought for you automatically, and if you're drinking with friends you likely have a tab and one bill. It depends on where you are I guess.
That said, I don't think this will make waitstaff's lives any easier. Depending on how it is used it COULD allow a waitress to spend more time on the most profitable customers, ie, big tippers, (the regulars), and only visit the other tables when the 'low beer warning' light goes off (assuming a pager-like device carried by the waitress). Mostly it's just a neat-o gizmo, but I have to say, I would be curious to see a trial run somewhere and what the results are.
Well, common sense tells me that the sensor will signal your server, who will come over and ask if anyone wants another drink. Just because it's RFID doesn't mean it has to be complicated, or track you, or infringe your freedoms, or take money out of your wallet.
It does if you want to compress more than 1 file into an archive...
That's all most lawyers do. They show up in court, sit for a few hours listening (or not) to the prosecution, and poke little holes in their evidence. That's all you have to do to defend yourself. It is up to the state to make sure all their ducks are lined up and the case is airtight, and your guilt proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
Of course, law, like any technical subject, has people who are considered experts in their field. I urge any intersted /.ers to read some Supreme Court opinions/excerpts (including (or especially) the dissenting ones) on a recent high profile case. To me, the casual observer, the case is often very clear cut, and issues known, etc, etc, and I'm all ready to offer my solutions and opinions on it. But I know shit all about law. Like me trying to explain something, or contribute to a serious discussion about quantum physics. I grasp the general idea, but that's about it, and I'm sure I'd sound like an idiot. So back to the SC. Reading the explanations for their decisions is extremely enlightening. You'll be going like, 'hey, I never thought of that', or 'good point', or, 'hmm, really? damn who knew?' These people obviously more than just know their way around law. They're intimately involved with it on a daily basis. They spend a lot of time thinking about these issues. They understand what's involved. And still they disagree.
It's like kernel design, or CPU architecture. To a casual observer (ie, 99% of /. (no really, I shit you not)), the issues involved seem very simple. 'Why doesn't Linus just put in that patch? X will run 3 times as fast with it!' or 'why doesn't Intel throw another meg of L1 cache on their chips? What are they, dumbasses or something? Don't they know that'll boost performance 200%?' Well, the reality is somewhat more complicated, and experts in the field have their reasons. They're not always right, and it's not like they should not be questioned, but they know a heck of a lot more than you do, and more often than not, it's YOU who's missing something.
I find that too... caffeine definitely has an effect on me, no denying that, but it doesn't prevent me from falling asleep, should I want to sleep. But, an important point, what is the quality of sleep like? I think I get BETTER sleep, and wake up feeling better, if I'm not all wired beforehand.
Huh? And why would I do that? That makes no sense at all. If I can get a superior product at a lower price, why on earth would I buy from a competitor? Maybe there ought to be a law against making better products?
I think it's got more potential to integrate granular deliverables, especially in this post-bust economy, but right now MS simply has better core capabilities to enhance transparent web services.
Say what?! Can you translate that into English?
What exactly are you doing in your seat on a plane that cameras bother you? There are already cameras watching your every move, put in places where potential for recording an embarassing moment, or expectation of privacy, is far higher than on a plane.
I imagine most of the shots will just have the tops of people's heads sticking over the seats, and stewardesses, as it seems half the time the aisles are blocked by the drink cart anyways.
I don't see why this is such a huge issue. Come to think of it, I'm wondering what took so long to get cameras on flights.
This dual language thing always interested me.
In Canada, English and French officially have the same legal status. This means, all (at least federal) law much be bilingual. What happens when the translations disagree subtly?
The coating used on the blades to make them sharp (titanium?) makes a very sharp edge, but wears out quickly. Your face, while not very hard, dulls edges very effectively. The blades are still sharp, relatively speaking, but not sharp enough for a smooth shave in the 'safety razor' configuration.
Also, pay no attention to the blue strip. Mine wears out almost completely before the week is over, and the razor lasts a good couple of weeks at least.
I dunno... I've always been calling them 'laptops', seemed logical to me.
Yes, but I bet GPL doesn't contradict any of your locally applicable laws. If a licence prohibits reverse engineering (even for compatibility or interoperability), then that part is illegal in a good chunk of the world, US even. I don't see anything in the GPL that is illegal. In any case, GPL is not a EULA; it doesn't apply to USERS.
Microsoft is not going to realize anything, ever. What you are reading coming from MS is marketing. It is meant to influence people. That's the sole purpose, that's what a company does. It's how they make money. This news release was not an accident, nothing that was not meant to be revealed has been revealed. It's all perfectly, 100% calculated to create a specific effect, and I bet it's doing an excellent job so far.
/. readership combined.
The people running MS, OTOH, have a far better awareness, knowledge and feel of the situation than all of
You think support wasn't included as part of the MS deal? How is that any different from Linux? Hey, Linux is free, and the support costs are hidden. IBM came in with support to the table, as did MS.
That's such bullshit, and you know it. In most political elections of any importance, you will have 2 (TWO) candidates. You can almost bet they're both far far from your ideal politician. SO what are you gonna do? Vote for the least corrupt one? Not vote? And that's assuming you even KNOW (or CARE) in the first place. People get elected by sheep, not by fully informed voters.
Truth is, if you have lots of money, you're also, sooner or later, neck deep in politics. And if you're in high level politics (above local level) you already ARE (and must be) neck deep in money. Either yours, or someone elses. Don't kid yourself.
(I'll grant you, there are some exceptions, very few to be sure.)
MQ Series is pretty damn cool. It's ancient (and by extension, hardcore) tech.
Basically, you have an app connect to it on one end, send some messages (a message is just a string, encode it however you like). The queue/message server stores these messages, until another app connects to it on the other end (a listener/consumer) and picks up the message.
The idea is that it's standard. Lots of enterprise level stuff can talk to it. There are Perl modules to do it. It's asynchronous (obviously). Has lots of queueing options for different types of uses and scenarios. Well supported.
I guess, sure, you could build your own message server, but it's not exactly a trivial task. People who need these kinds of things know they need them, that's why pages for products like MQ Series seem so vague.
This is just a 'special' deal they give to people who call in to cancel to get them to stay with the service. Better to keep a customer with no margin than lose him to MSN or lose a subscriber from their total of bazillions.
But it doesn't work the same way as IE. For one, you need to install plug-ins again, something that like 90% of the users haven't had to do in years, thanks to activex.
What?!?! All that does is fill the supply chain with merchandise. How much could that possibly be? And if it doesn't sell, retailers will complain, try to return the boxes, try to get a better deal on them, or get MS to do more marketing to move the product.