It's not the government's business to "invest" in particular companies, regardless of whether or not it uses their products.
False. The government already invests in a company simply by choosing that company's products.
When a government agency chooses MS Office, they've chosen to make a long-term investment in Microsoft, both in training and infrastructure, and in the purchase of the product itself. You may not think of this as an investment, but at the point of product adoption, the government has a financial interest in the continued viability of Microsoft. The same is true for choosing OpenOffice -- an big investment is already made simply by choosing to adopt it, so helping to ensure that OO continues as a viable product is in the government's best financial interest.
I donate to projects that are doing really great work. But that doesn't mean my tax dollars should go to them.
Typical knee-jerk conservatism by someone who doesn't understand conservatism (or basic finance). There's nothing wrong with making an investment in resources, which is what he's trying to do.
Giving a little money to continue the development of a product the state is using and that's saving the state significant money is an investment, as surely as doing maintenance on a bridge or a highway is an investment. The money helps ensure continued development and support for the product, so that the state spends a little right now to save a lot in the long run.
This is basic small-'r' republicanism that has been foolishly and disingenuously demonized by big-'R' Republicans to the point where government investment now takes place in multimillion dollar rebuilds (and multi-trillion dollar bailouts) instead of common sense, long-term money-saving measures.
I don't see how Apple buying Lala precludes amazon from offering similar streaming. Nor does it mean that Google can't partner with Amazon to offer something similar.
You're right, but this was my exact thought when Google bought YouTube. Anyone could build another service with the same functionality, so why should Google bother? Turns out it was a smart acquisition simply because YouTube was already so entrenched as THE place for video -- the BRAND was worth the purchase price, especially given the newer video advertising models (that are still somewhat being worked out).
Personally, I never heard of Lala before Apple's interest. But based on what others have said, it may offer similar advantages.
Just because you know about something doesn't mean everyone else does.
I'm too young to remember Jaws, Howard Cosell, the Dick van Dyke Show, James Cagney, flappers, and ragtime, but I know what all these are. It's called "cultural literacy", and without it, much of the world WOOSHes by you. Reading helps.
Salon hasn't been relevant in a long time, partially because of the paywall, but I still see regular allusions to it in the media.
Your sewers were built without Federal subsidies? Your roads and highways are built without Federal subsidies? Your private firemen don't get Federal subsidies? Which utopian city do you live in, again? Do you even know what your representatives -- both local and national -- do?
Perhaps if your kids take a civics class in their private school they can share with you what they learn.
Unfortunately, most of the work for a modern librarian is focused on acquiring and maintaining funding to maintain the library, and far too many communities face losing these resources.
'Funding' --outside of the occasional grant application in academic libraries -- is rarely part of the job of a typical librarian, particularly at the entry level. Unless you're referring to a rural public library, with a staff of 1 or 2.
Unfortunately, all I have to believe any of this are translations of translations of recollections years after the fact. Do you know any U.S. soldiers in Iraq? I do, and 2 out of 3 of them believe Saddam was involved in 9/11, and would happily have died believing that ridiculous lie.
Judging Truth based on how many people believe it -- particularly when those people died 2000 years ago -- is beyond asinine.
Re:And what could be more pointless than Twitter?
on
The Twitter Book
·
· Score: 1
And following the odd celebrity like the mythbusters
are you just a dishonest supporter of crime, or are you really that stupid?
Both! But really, a $180 speeding ticket is a deterrent, because if I get caught I'm out $180. $2-million is NOT a deterrent, because there's no way in hell I can even make a dent in that large of an amount, so it's just a fucking joke.
Based to this verdict, you should be able to look at all the music shared on filesharing websites, multiply by $80,000, and get the "real" value of the music industry.
According to this article, 5 billion songs were shared in 2006. That means that the music industry, if it weren't for those pesky pirates, would be raking in $400 trillion dollars more than they are right now.
Agreed -- if only there were some crazy invention that allowed us to communicate over long distances without actually having to travel anywhere. Now THAT would change EVERYTHING...
Why is it Google's fault that your expectations of them are unrealistic?
Because his expectations were fully possible and perfectly understandable given Google's history. Google tends to under-promise and over-deliver. In this case (as in Chrome, IMHO) they've not promised much at all, and still under-delivered.
When I first heard of Android, I pictured a Linux distro with the attractiveness and user-centeredness of Apple, mixed with the openness and security of Linux, and somehow integrated with Google's various apps. The result would destroy Apple on the desktop and relegate MS to business machines. Instead we got a pretty good phone OS that will somehow be shoehorned onto a Netbook -- something along the lines of Ubuntu-lite. Pointless.
Flamebait? omnichad is right! There are too many variables involved to explain why you may be having problems with "vertical-align: middle" and other CSS. That isn't indicative of CSS being convoluted at all.
It's like if I said, "Sorry, tables don't work for me." There are a thousand mistakes I could be making -- convoluted doesn't enter into it.
Slashdot Mirror
It's not the government's business to "invest" in particular companies, regardless of whether or not it uses their products.
False. The government already invests in a company simply by choosing that company's products.
When a government agency chooses MS Office, they've chosen to make a long-term investment in Microsoft, both in training and infrastructure, and in the purchase of the product itself. You may not think of this as an investment, but at the point of product adoption, the government has a financial interest in the continued viability of Microsoft. The same is true for choosing OpenOffice -- an big investment is already made simply by choosing to adopt it, so helping to ensure that OO continues as a viable product is in the government's best financial interest.
I donate to projects that are doing really great work. But that doesn't mean my tax dollars should go to them.
Typical knee-jerk conservatism by someone who doesn't understand conservatism (or basic finance). There's nothing wrong with making an investment in resources, which is what he's trying to do.
Giving a little money to continue the development of a product the state is using and that's saving the state significant money is an investment, as surely as doing maintenance on a bridge or a highway is an investment. The money helps ensure continued development and support for the product, so that the state spends a little right now to save a lot in the long run.
This is basic small-'r' republicanism that has been foolishly and disingenuously demonized by big-'R' Republicans to the point where government investment now takes place in multimillion dollar rebuilds (and multi-trillion dollar bailouts) instead of common sense, long-term money-saving measures.
_______________
Yes, I'm a conservative.
You really, REALLY need a girlfriend.
I don't see how Apple buying Lala precludes amazon from offering similar streaming. Nor does it mean that Google can't partner with Amazon to offer something similar.
You're right, but this was my exact thought when Google bought YouTube. Anyone could build another service with the same functionality, so why should Google bother? Turns out it was a smart acquisition simply because YouTube was already so entrenched as THE place for video -- the BRAND was worth the purchase price, especially given the newer video advertising models (that are still somewhat being worked out).
Personally, I never heard of Lala before Apple's interest. But based on what others have said, it may offer similar advantages.
Lala was in a better position to bring music people want directly to them.
This is precisely why Apple should purchase Pirate Bay.
Just because you know about something doesn't mean everyone else does.
I'm too young to remember Jaws, Howard Cosell, the Dick van Dyke Show, James Cagney, flappers, and ragtime, but I know what all these are. It's called "cultural literacy", and without it, much of the world WOOSHes by you. Reading helps.
Salon hasn't been relevant in a long time, partially because of the paywall, but I still see regular allusions to it in the media.
Your sewers were built without Federal subsidies? Your roads and highways are built without Federal subsidies? Your private firemen don't get Federal subsidies? Which utopian city do you live in, again? Do you even know what your representatives -- both local and national -- do?
Perhaps if your kids take a civics class in their private school they can share with you what they learn.
For the first time in the history of the Republic we had a war without a tax increase to pay for it.
Actually, it was the first time in all of recorded history that had happened, with results that should have been obvious to anyone who can count.
I suspect he heard about "robots.txt" before slashdot existed
Just out of curiosity, what is it that you think Mr. Murdoch does for a living that he would have been familiar with "robots.txt" prior to 1997?
Have you ever searched for some information, and Google gave a hit where the surrounding text of the query already answers your question?
For general information? Yes. For news? No.
I begin my day with oatmeal and Google News. If a story isn't linked from there, then it doesn't get read.
Apparently slashdotted - unless my ISP is blocking me!!
(& thanks for the link!!)
Unfortunately, most of the work for a modern librarian is focused on acquiring and maintaining funding to maintain the library, and far too many communities face losing these resources.
'Funding' --outside of the occasional grant application in academic libraries -- is rarely part of the job of a typical librarian, particularly at the entry level. Unless you're referring to a rural public library, with a staff of 1 or 2.
/yes, librarian
Assuming you're talking about the U.S. (as the comment you replied to clearly was), you comment is false -- there is no 'do not call' list for cell phones, because it is illegal in the U.S. for telemarkets to call cell phones using automated dialers.
John Hinckley spent most of his life locked away for a celebrity -- a far worse fate than dying IMHO. He must have been right about Jody Foster.
Unfortunately, all I have to believe any of this are translations of translations of recollections years after the fact. Do you know any U.S. soldiers in Iraq? I do, and 2 out of 3 of them believe Saddam was involved in 9/11, and would happily have died believing that ridiculous lie.
Judging Truth based on how many people believe it -- particularly when those people died 2000 years ago -- is beyond asinine.
And following the odd celebrity like the mythbusters
Odd celebrity, indeed.
should we demand psych treatment for people who enjoy ... furries?
Yes.
are you just a dishonest supporter of crime, or are you really that stupid?
Both! But really, a $180 speeding ticket is a deterrent, because if I get caught I'm out $180. $2-million is NOT a deterrent, because there's no way in hell I can even make a dent in that large of an amount, so it's just a fucking joke.
Based to this verdict, you should be able to look at all the music shared on filesharing websites, multiply by $80,000, and get the "real" value of the music industry.
According to this article, 5 billion songs were shared in 2006. That means that the music industry, if it weren't for those pesky pirates, would be raking in $400 trillion dollars more than they are right now.
I find that unlikely.
Bad laws breed bad verdicts -- this tends to be the message of /. legal news.
Agreed -- if only there were some crazy invention that allowed us to communicate over long distances without actually having to travel anywhere. Now THAT would change EVERYTHING...
Why is it Google's fault that your expectations of them are unrealistic?
Because his expectations were fully possible and perfectly understandable given Google's history. Google tends to under-promise and over-deliver. In this case (as in Chrome, IMHO) they've not promised much at all, and still under-delivered.
When I first heard of Android, I pictured a Linux distro with the attractiveness and user-centeredness of Apple, mixed with the openness and security of Linux, and somehow integrated with Google's various apps. The result would destroy Apple on the desktop and relegate MS to business machines. Instead we got a pretty good phone OS that will somehow be shoehorned onto a Netbook -- something along the lines of Ubuntu-lite. Pointless.
You also have to be dead -- I'm sure the RIAA would be happy to oblige.
Flamebait? omnichad is right! There are too many variables involved to explain why you may be having problems with "vertical-align: middle" and other CSS. That isn't indicative of CSS being convoluted at all.
It's like if I said, "Sorry, tables don't work for me." There are a thousand mistakes I could be making -- convoluted doesn't enter into it.
They don't have to suck, either.