dude, if you want to touch another guy, just ask them.
otherwise, revenge is stupid and it only continues a cycle of violence. it doesn't matter if you don't have the imagination to eliminate the conflict from your life without violence, it's the violence that is lame. However, with a nick like "Lord Frodo" it may be a foregone conclusion that you view the world in terms of battle. it doesn't seem to matter to you that your bully (or his friends) just moved on to the next weakest kid.
However, if it's the latter case, then Best Buy really does have good reason for going after people who leak information that they never planned to release into the public domain.
Right, except they're not going after the people who leaked the information, they're going after the people who publish it. Once it's leaked, it's not a secret, and publishers play no role in this as has been demonstrated in many court cases (cf. Pentagon Papers). They want to shoot the messenger rather than clean up their own house!
Let's say we agree that "violent crime" means some act of one person against another involving physical injury. Let's also say that we agree that a "zoning law" is a law (we know what that means, right?) that governs what kinds of structures may be constructed on a plot of land. If we're close enough having come this far, what pray tell would you say the term "Intellectual Property" means? I just want to make sure the equivalency you spread out actually measures up.
...when another shoe was going to drop. Ever since IBM Motions to Compel last week I've been watching SCOX price start to freefall. Every time the market starts to lose their faith and the stock price drops The SCO Group comes out with another outrageous action. Par for the course and more grist for the pump-n-dump police.
Another possibility was RAID 5, which allows 5 drives to act as 4 drives. An additional parity track is written on each drive, so if one fails, then the other drives can recover the lost data. This is available through software or hardware. This is a great solution if you do not plan to upgrade your maximum server capacity. When the time comes to replace a drive with a higher capacity drive, you will be forced to replace the entire array.
Right. The thing reads more like an excuse to play with some SATA drives they got for review or something. At any rate, the article presents some seriously flawed and amateurish design decisions under the guise of "budget" architechture.
I bet your Best Buy *does* stock 400k songs. It's not that many, you know, in the scheme of available music. Pricewise, I think it's fair to say that one of the drivers of P2P has been the poor quality of albums of late and the amount of filler beyond the songs you like that cause you to want to buy the album at all. A la carte services like ITMS allow people to construct their own albums outside of the titular album unit, so that I could buy only the songs I like off of (e.g.) AFI's latest album. We have yet to see what the dividing line is in this PPD model between people sucking up the crap and buying an entire album for the $10 price, and people who only get the songs they like. In my experience, P2P behavior has illustrated that people drift toward a la carte given the choice. This pushes up the price of albums when the repertoire isn't collected at the package price. You want to buy Tool's "Aenima" but don't want "Hooker With A Penis"? That $10 album just became $14. Much closer to typical prices. How much for you to put together your own "Gangsta Rap Greatest Hits", $30? At a track-at-a-time, music collections can get very expensive very quickly.
In contrast and apropos to nothing, vinyl is much cheaper these days on a track by track basis, and get this: it will sound better in the future as the playback equipment improves (as it is always doing, yes even for turntables). Try that with your 128k Beyonce MP3. This isn't to puff up any vinyl vs. CD vs. file debate, but hopefully it illustrates how much more consumers should be demanding in their music file services.
if they can't make money at $.99 a song, then why are 20 companies popping up every week doing the exact same thing with no hardware business?
This has nothing to do with.com bubbles or selling players or anything. It has everthing to do with the RIAA industry wanting to maintain their outdated unit-price business model. Rather than using their imagination to figure out a subscription licensing model that would allow for a true celestial jukebox, they are forcing Apple to accept a price-per-download license (with DRM, and a limited catalog) that only meets peoples' needs because it's the only thing available.
Be smart, avoid pay-per-download like the plague unless you like the idea of paying for a CD at CD prices, but without the CD. That's what the established record industry would like (I'm sure it fits nicely into their existing PeopleSoft modules), but it's even less that what you get from them now, with a MUCH poorer selection than what you find at even Best Buy.
If there's one thing that I've learned since the mid-80s when I started becoming aware of monopolies, insider trading, junk bonds, etc., it's that white-collar crime is always profitable. If you're willing to do the time, you won't ever be fined as much as you gained from the illegal behavior.
What percentage of that T3 is taken up by flash interface & advertising and how much is consumed by the text content? I'm sure you'd find that the site could survive on much less than a T3 and 30 employees.
The "implicit agreement" you speak of is tantamount to "women know their place"...there is no agreement though you may think of it as a custom. Ad-pushing business hopes for (and assumes, it seems) pandemic Stockholm syndrome which doesn't necessarily exist.
Nothing wrong in documenting APIs and then disclosing that they won't be supported with some particular version when that actually happens. Microsoft is a marketing-driven company and *always* says that changes in software are due to customer desire (including security), so where would that leave you? APIs should be discontinued even though people still want to use them? I think they'd rather not have this problem and be able to continue using undoc'ed APIs as long as THEY want to, which would both help their own software's entrenchment and leave the discontinuation decision as a purely internal matter.
You're throwing up a red herring, there are tons of published APIs that aren't supported anymore.
Indeed, and this points to a possible larger conclusion: people don't like ads. Huh? But they're everywhere! It brings up that old joke: Everybody complains about the weather but nobody does anything about it. Well, this is doing something about it. The only reason people put up with ads is because they're forced to (think TV, Salon, Yahoo Groups), etc. I'm not aware of anybody voting for more ads in the media they consume (and no, negative options don't count. I'm not voting yes on ads just because I'm not paying for a subscription). Symantec (for all their ills) is bringing this issue to the forefront.
None of these is currently a market leader. Perhaps RedHat ought not to shut the doors just yet.
And as we all know, it's not worth doing unless you're going to be the undisputed dominator. Your mindset does more to kill innovation than Microsoft ever could.
I used to do this all the time when I was a poor twentysomething. The fines were decreased by about half every time. The court actually *likes* it when people try to be responsible for their own lives and finances. Go figure.
Sure, we all love Hanlon, but his razor is not all-encompassing. I don't believe that explaining SCO's actions as "stupidity" is *sufficient* at all. This isn't a personal attitude, it's just that with all the complications, details and seemingly malpracticed legal maneuvers that there is just too much going on for stupid people to be responsible, and furthermore that there are smart people doing stupid things. Don't think for a minute that they don't have a plan, and that SCO execs aren't just flying off the handle randomly because their legal staff thinks that whatever they want to do is just fine. While we may not be able to accurately speculate what that plan is, it doesn't mean that there isn't one that we'll find out about later.
There is one further piece of evidence that would absolutely prove the claims are frivolous - if we could show that a large corporation who has stated that Linux is its only real competitor was a major financial backer of SCO, then SCO's motivations would be obvious and I think you could just through the suit out.
This would be a fishing expedition on par with what SCO is asking IBM to do in the matter at hand.
Silly speculation, but I wonder if the IBM lawyers anticipated this move, SCO's attempt to make their case after discovery. Occam would say this is reactive maneuvering on SCO's part, though.
Now, perhaps AOL should have presented the user with some lengthy announcement about their intentions, and then allowed the user to opt out of the change.
You leave this dangling at the end of your comment like it's a minor consideration, but it's at least as significant as your "greater good" argument. In the past it has been common for ISPs to notify their userbase both of changes in their systems and of changes they'd like the user to make on their own computer. "Here's how to do [x], if you'd like us to do it for you, click this URL." It's creepy that they chose the sneaky way, and that's what the controversy is about. Well that, and the general legalities which remain to be seen.
You can change the IRQ of the parallel port fairly easily. Beyond that, I was mostly making fun of how poorly you constructed your sentence. A grammar flame.
I gave him the benefit of the doubt that, taken in the context of the surrounding paragraphs, that statement didn't literally mean that "people who like linux are going to blow up buildings".
So what use does the word "terrorist" have in this context? Inflammatory rhetoric? Incisive observation? If we continue on your idea to pay attention to context, what sense of the t-word in today's media and political environment does *not* imply exploding architecture? That is to ask, is it even possible today to use "terrorist" as a metaphor without bringing to mind the bombs and buildings? I don't think so.
While you may have had a naturally paranoid reaction to reject these obvious comparisons and implications because, you know, he probably meant better (probably!), this is also a crappy, broad-brush rationalization: your assumption that he didn't mean what you initially got from the article. Since you say you decided to give him the benefit of the doubt, you imply (I know, that word) that you initially took it at face value. This is the problem...in a bomb, er, nutshell.
You sound like my dad! It's always the best time to buy new hardware, and it's always the worst time to buy hardware. Big whoop. We all know about the grain of salt. The grain of salt is not a protected sekrit.
Sure, while few people might buy everything on the list, it's more of an snapshot overview for people like me who might be piecemeal upgrading. Don't be such a party pooper, some people actually like to know what's really on the cutting edge and what just has a box that makes it look like the cutting edge.
Slashdot Mirror
dude, if you want to touch another guy, just ask them.
otherwise, revenge is stupid and it only continues a cycle of violence. it doesn't matter if you don't have the imagination to eliminate the conflict from your life without violence, it's the violence that is lame. However, with a nick like "Lord Frodo" it may be a foregone conclusion that you view the world in terms of battle. it doesn't seem to matter to you that your bully (or his friends) just moved on to the next weakest kid.
However, if it's the latter case, then Best Buy really does have good reason for going after people who leak information that they never planned to release into the public domain.
Right, except they're not going after the people who leaked the information, they're going after the people who publish it. Once it's leaked, it's not a secret, and publishers play no role in this as has been demonstrated in many court cases (cf. Pentagon Papers). They want to shoot the messenger rather than clean up their own house!
Let's say we agree that "violent crime" means some act of one person against another involving physical injury. Let's also say that we agree that a "zoning law" is a law (we know what that means, right?) that governs what kinds of structures may be constructed on a plot of land. If we're close enough having come this far, what pray tell would you say the term "Intellectual Property" means? I just want to make sure the equivalency you spread out actually measures up.
...when another shoe was going to drop. Ever since IBM Motions to Compel last week I've been watching SCOX price start to freefall. Every time the market starts to lose their faith and the stock price drops The SCO Group comes out with another outrageous action. Par for the course and more grist for the pump-n-dump police.
And wouldn't someone have to have contacted GS in order to communicate the statement, "fix this or I will post it publicly"?
Well, this is where I stopped reading:
Another possibility was RAID 5, which allows 5 drives to act as 4 drives. An additional parity track is written on each drive, so if one fails, then the other drives can recover the lost data. This is available through software or hardware. This is a great solution if you do not plan to upgrade your maximum server capacity. When the time comes to replace a drive with a higher capacity drive, you will be forced to replace the entire array.
Right. The thing reads more like an excuse to play with some SATA drives they got for review or something. At any rate, the article presents some seriously flawed and amateurish design decisions under the guise of "budget" architechture.
Hey coward,
I bet your Best Buy *does* stock 400k songs. It's not that many, you know, in the scheme of available music. Pricewise, I think it's fair to say that one of the drivers of P2P has been the poor quality of albums of late and the amount of filler beyond the songs you like that cause you to want to buy the album at all. A la carte services like ITMS allow people to construct their own albums outside of the titular album unit, so that I could buy only the songs I like off of (e.g.) AFI's latest album. We have yet to see what the dividing line is in this PPD model between people sucking up the crap and buying an entire album for the $10 price, and people who only get the songs they like. In my experience, P2P behavior has illustrated that people drift toward a la carte given the choice. This pushes up the price of albums when the repertoire isn't collected at the package price. You want to buy Tool's "Aenima" but don't want "Hooker With A Penis"? That $10 album just became $14. Much closer to typical prices. How much for you to put together your own "Gangsta Rap Greatest Hits", $30? At a track-at-a-time, music collections can get very expensive very quickly.
In contrast and apropos to nothing, vinyl is much cheaper these days on a track by track basis, and get this: it will sound better in the future as the playback equipment improves (as it is always doing, yes even for turntables). Try that with your 128k Beyonce MP3. This isn't to puff up any vinyl vs. CD vs. file debate, but hopefully it illustrates how much more consumers should be demanding in their music file services.
if they can't make money at $.99 a song, then why are 20 companies popping up every week doing the exact same thing with no hardware business?
.com bubbles or selling players or anything. It has everthing to do with the RIAA industry wanting to maintain their outdated unit-price business model. Rather than using their imagination to figure out a subscription licensing model that would allow for a true celestial jukebox, they are forcing Apple to accept a price-per-download license (with DRM, and a limited catalog) that only meets peoples' needs because it's the only thing available.
This has nothing to do with
Be smart, avoid pay-per-download like the plague unless you like the idea of paying for a CD at CD prices, but without the CD. That's what the established record industry would like (I'm sure it fits nicely into their existing PeopleSoft modules), but it's even less that what you get from them now, with a MUCH poorer selection than what you find at even Best Buy.
If there's one thing that I've learned since the mid-80s when I started becoming aware of monopolies, insider trading, junk bonds, etc., it's that white-collar crime is always profitable. If you're willing to do the time, you won't ever be fined as much as you gained from the illegal behavior.
What percentage of that T3 is taken up by flash interface & advertising and how much is consumed by the text content? I'm sure you'd find that the site could survive on much less than a T3 and 30 employees.
The "implicit agreement" you speak of is tantamount to "women know their place"...there is no agreement though you may think of it as a custom. Ad-pushing business hopes for (and assumes, it seems) pandemic Stockholm syndrome which doesn't necessarily exist.
Nothing wrong in documenting APIs and then disclosing that they won't be supported with some particular version when that actually happens. Microsoft is a marketing-driven company and *always* says that changes in software are due to customer desire (including security), so where would that leave you? APIs should be discontinued even though people still want to use them? I think they'd rather not have this problem and be able to continue using undoc'ed APIs as long as THEY want to, which would both help their own software's entrenchment and leave the discontinuation decision as a purely internal matter.
You're throwing up a red herring, there are tons of published APIs that aren't supported anymore.
Indeed, and this points to a possible larger conclusion: people don't like ads. Huh? But they're everywhere! It brings up that old joke: Everybody complains about the weather but nobody does anything about it. Well, this is doing something about it. The only reason people put up with ads is because they're forced to (think TV, Salon, Yahoo Groups), etc. I'm not aware of anybody voting for more ads in the media they consume (and no, negative options don't count. I'm not voting yes on ads just because I'm not paying for a subscription). Symantec (for all their ills) is bringing this issue to the forefront.
None of these is currently a market leader. Perhaps RedHat ought not to shut the doors just yet.
And as we all know, it's not worth doing unless you're going to be the undisputed dominator. Your mindset does more to kill innovation than Microsoft ever could.
I used to do this all the time when I was a poor twentysomething. The fines were decreased by about half every time. The court actually *likes* it when people try to be responsible for their own lives and finances. Go figure.
And another thing...why is she only having to plead guilty to *conspiracy*? It's ridiculous!
Sure, we all love Hanlon, but his razor is not all-encompassing. I don't believe that explaining SCO's actions as "stupidity" is *sufficient* at all. This isn't a personal attitude, it's just that with all the complications, details and seemingly malpracticed legal maneuvers that there is just too much going on for stupid people to be responsible, and furthermore that there are smart people doing stupid things. Don't think for a minute that they don't have a plan, and that SCO execs aren't just flying off the handle randomly because their legal staff thinks that whatever they want to do is just fine. While we may not be able to accurately speculate what that plan is, it doesn't mean that there isn't one that we'll find out about later.
For one thing, you can sell more of the cheaper cartriges.
Good thing you backup regularly.
There is one further piece of evidence that would absolutely prove the claims are frivolous - if we could show that a large corporation who has stated that Linux is its only real competitor was a major financial backer of SCO, then SCO's motivations would be obvious and I think you could just through the suit out.
This would be a fishing expedition on par with what SCO is asking IBM to do in the matter at hand.
Silly speculation, but I wonder if the IBM lawyers anticipated this move, SCO's attempt to make their case after discovery. Occam would say this is reactive maneuvering on SCO's part, though.
Now, perhaps AOL should have presented the user with some lengthy announcement about their intentions, and then allowed the user to opt out of the change.
You leave this dangling at the end of your comment like it's a minor consideration, but it's at least as significant as your "greater good" argument. In the past it has been common for ISPs to notify their userbase both of changes in their systems and of changes they'd like the user to make on their own computer. "Here's how to do [x], if you'd like us to do it for you, click this URL." It's creepy that they chose the sneaky way, and that's what the controversy is about. Well that, and the general legalities which remain to be seen.
You can change the IRQ of the parallel port fairly easily. Beyond that, I was mostly making fun of how poorly you constructed your sentence. A grammar flame.
I gave him the benefit of the doubt that, taken in the context of the surrounding paragraphs, that statement didn't literally mean that "people who like linux are going to blow up buildings".
So what use does the word "terrorist" have in this context? Inflammatory rhetoric? Incisive observation? If we continue on your idea to pay attention to context, what sense of the t-word in today's media and political environment does *not* imply exploding architecture? That is to ask, is it even possible today to use "terrorist" as a metaphor without bringing to mind the bombs and buildings? I don't think so.
While you may have had a naturally paranoid reaction to reject these obvious comparisons and implications because, you know, he probably meant better (probably!), this is also a crappy, broad-brush rationalization: your assumption that he didn't mean what you initially got from the article. Since you say you decided to give him the benefit of the doubt, you imply (I know, that word) that you initially took it at face value. This is the problem...in a bomb, er, nutshell.
UNIX: Find it, fsck it, forget it.
Now I see your point in maintaining tolerance for others' sexual preferences!
You sound like my dad! It's always the best time to buy new hardware, and it's always the worst time to buy hardware. Big whoop. We all know about the grain of salt. The grain of salt is not a protected sekrit.
Sure, while few people might buy everything on the list, it's more of an snapshot overview for people like me who might be piecemeal upgrading. Don't be such a party pooper, some people actually like to know what's really on the cutting edge and what just has a box that makes it look like the cutting edge.