This is not a sound analogy. The food stamp program was not devised to spark competition between suppliers, it was devised to provide people a safety net. On your next point, the entire point of vouchers was to allow parents the option to decide where their portion of the education money would be spent - be it a public or private institution.
Your point on the efficiency of some systems is well-taken. I attended a Jesuit high school myself, and while it wasn't terrifically expensive, the education was light-years better than what was available at the public school that I left. For families that couldn't afford it, there was financial aid available, and this was repaid in part by having the students do work at the school.
Despite all this, the point still remains - there were only a certain number of slots available. I don't think they had a waiting list, but if vouchers had been available, this might have been a distinct possibility.
People who talk about vouchers forget something: just because one has a voucher doesn't mean that they're going to be *able* pursue their choice of education. There are many logistics to consider - like schools of choice already being filled to capacity. And then there's the transportation issue - if the school happens to be across town, who will be responsible for ensuring that the kid can even get there? I'd venture a guess that vouchers or not, for many, the public school system will be the only option *left*.
Not only that, but if you key into certain personalities on a site like youtube, you can start to see some interesting interaction - people vlogging back and forth about this and that...some of it confrontational, some of it humorous, and some just plain interesting. It's almost like a new version of reality TV, except that the events are unfolding in real-time, and are completely unscripted. The kicker is that the entire audience has an opportunity to participate.
Lineage 2 - I know this sounds weird, but despite the farmers, the griefing, the endless walking, and the insane amounts of grinding required to level, I kind of miss it. I didn't get too far (only a 40 dwarf and a 30 archer), but it still had some kind of obscure appeal. I was never a strong PvP player, but I still think the environment is kind of cool.
That's not what I'm saying at all. In fact, I'm saying the exact opposite. I'm saying that whether Microsoft is good, bad, or somewhere in between, the fact is that it has a monopoly on the market. This monopoly exists for several reasons, but one of the driving forces is that the penetration is so great that it's not feasible to use any competing (and potentially incompatible) products. One significant barrier to the adoption of alternatives is this very issue of compatibility. Where a consumer's *own data* is concerned, it should be ILLEGAL for a company to prevent or obstruct access by competing products.
Users can only *reliably and practically* choose a competing product when ALL document formats, file system formats, and other protocols that govern the storage, exchange, and transformation of their Microsoft-created documents, are freely available and complete. This simply cannot happen when patents and other roadblocks (think DMCA) exist to limit the potential for a successful, and trouble-free transition. Vendor lock-in is one of the oldest (and most effective) tricks in the book.
What's interesting is that you'll find that no more prevalent at the bottom of the ladder, than at the top. The only difference is the amount of money involved. The attitude is the same.
I received a call from our local ILEC trying to sell me a better deal than I currently had. It sounded ok, so I decided I'd go for it - until the rep told me that he had to connect me with a third-party verification service. He said they would only ask about three fairly general questions, and that would be it. As soon as they asked for my birthday, I terminated the call.
Also, people should know that companies selling card readers often list, as a *feature* the ability to capture information and use it later - for mailing lists, sale to other businesses, whatever. It's probably safe to *assume* that anyone swiping your license will retain and use the information long after your visit.
Probably so, but I don't anticipate that they ever thought their own code would be used by the very entity attempting to lead open-source software to its deathbed. I'd venture to suggest that the sense of goodwill associated with the BSD license existed long before software patents and the notion of software-based "intellectual property."
This is laughable, because this interoperability stuff is exactly what makes Microsoft an anti-competitive monopoly. I personally believe that since Linux tools like SAMBA and NTFS offer users means to access their own data, these should in no way be subject to claims of infringement. It's equivalent to selling a live-sustaining or life-saving medical device with a heavily DRMed, copy-protected switch that ONLY works under the conditions established by its manufacturer. This is serious enough to warrant consideration of logic that goes something like this..."you can have a monopoly, OR patented IP, but not both." There is simply too much at stake - especially with Microsoft's track record.
Patents, were, after all, designed to spur innovation, and the only way you can do that is to provide opportunities for other players in the market. You can't have other players if they can never quite get their foot in the door, fearing that they'll be sued into oblivion by monolithic, entrenched interests.
I believe that the minute a major network gets their hands on new talent, especially from the likes of YouTube or other vlogging community, it could very well end up in the removal of the elements that made the individual popular in the first place. Since their first priority is revenue, I'm convinced that they're likely to take whatever they get, and dumb it down to appeal to the widest possible audience. Therein lies the charm of YouTube et al. If you're not popular on YouTube, it's not YouTube's problem. YOU decide what to do about it, not the collective input of 10 managers at various levels of a corporate media company.
Although this sounds like a good idea, I don't think it would actually help. The major argument for the Bayh-Dole Act is that it gives universities an incentive to move patented discoveries into the applied realm where they may do some good; otherwise the patents languish underutilized.
I agree with your thoughts. In other words, the Bayh-Dole Act supposes that the only way a university can be inspired to get off its can and utilize its patents is if the taxpayers *pay* them to? What a load. It's a free market. If the universities want to let them go to waste, fine...but I don't feel it's in the taxpayers' interest or within their responsibility to engage in what is essentially a bribe. Talk about burning the candle at both ends...
I'll have to disagree...I'm not deriding them for using it, I'm deriding them because they've elected to substitute this "e-onics" English as the real thing.
Slashdot Mirror
The officer said I could be arrested for trespass and for violating the officer's privacy.
Violating the officer's privacy? They're public servants for christ's sake. They work for us.
Yeah, I especially hate those interview requests and job offers. They can be a real pain!
I think I worked 9-8 on the same day.
So, you slept for an hour on company time and then called it a day?
This is not a sound analogy. The food stamp program was not devised to spark competition between suppliers, it was devised to provide people a safety net. On your next point, the entire point of vouchers was to allow parents the option to decide where their portion of the education money would be spent - be it a public or private institution.
Your point on the efficiency of some systems is well-taken. I attended a Jesuit high school myself, and while it wasn't terrifically expensive, the education was light-years better than what was available at the public school that I left. For families that couldn't afford it, there was financial aid available, and this was repaid in part by having the students do work at the school.
Despite all this, the point still remains - there were only a certain number of slots available. I don't think they had a waiting list, but if vouchers had been available, this might have been a distinct possibility.
People who talk about vouchers forget something: just because one has a voucher doesn't mean that they're going to be *able* pursue their choice of education. There are many logistics to consider - like schools of choice already being filled to capacity. And then there's the transportation issue - if the school happens to be across town, who will be responsible for ensuring that the kid can even get there? I'd venture a guess that vouchers or not, for many, the public school system will be the only option *left*.
Not only that, but if you key into certain personalities on a site like youtube, you can start to see some interesting interaction - people vlogging back and forth about this and that...some of it confrontational, some of it humorous, and some just plain interesting. It's almost like a new version of reality TV, except that the events are unfolding in real-time, and are completely unscripted. The kicker is that the entire audience has an opportunity to participate.
Lineage 2 - I know this sounds weird, but despite the farmers, the griefing, the endless walking, and the insane amounts of grinding required to level, I kind of miss it. I didn't get too far (only a 40 dwarf and a 30 archer), but it still had some kind of obscure appeal. I was never a strong PvP player, but I still think the environment is kind of cool.
That's not what I'm saying at all. In fact, I'm saying the exact opposite. I'm saying that whether Microsoft is good, bad, or somewhere in between, the fact is that it has a monopoly on the market. This monopoly exists for several reasons, but one of the driving forces is that the penetration is so great that it's not feasible to use any competing (and potentially incompatible) products. One significant barrier to the adoption of alternatives is this very issue of compatibility. Where a consumer's *own data* is concerned, it should be ILLEGAL for a company to prevent or obstruct access by competing products.
Users can only *reliably and practically* choose a competing product when ALL document formats, file system formats, and other protocols that govern the storage, exchange, and transformation of their Microsoft-created documents, are freely available and complete. This simply cannot happen when patents and other roadblocks (think DMCA) exist to limit the potential for a successful, and trouble-free transition. Vendor lock-in is one of the oldest (and most effective) tricks in the book.
What's interesting is that you'll find that no more prevalent at the bottom of the ladder, than at the top. The only difference is the amount of money involved. The attitude is the same.
I received a call from our local ILEC trying to sell me a better deal than I currently had. It sounded ok, so I decided I'd go for it - until the rep told me that he had to connect me with a third-party verification service. He said they would only ask about three fairly general questions, and that would be it. As soon as they asked for my birthday, I terminated the call.
Also, people should know that companies selling card readers often list, as a *feature* the ability to capture information and use it later - for mailing lists, sale to other businesses, whatever. It's probably safe to *assume* that anyone swiping your license will retain and use the information long after your visit.
That's an awesome observation about the perils of misplaced marketing.
The patent system is so broken (even MS admits it) that Linux is very probably infringing thousand of Microsoft patents.
Thousands of Microsoft patents, or thousands of valid Microsoft patents?
It's my opinion that the BSD license is fine if you don't mind handing some rope over to someone who then uses it to strangle you.
Probably so, but I don't anticipate that they ever thought their own code would be used by the very entity attempting to lead open-source software to its deathbed. I'd venture to suggest that the sense of goodwill associated with the BSD license existed long before software patents and the notion of software-based "intellectual property."
More like pictures of nuclear missiles...there's no real evidence yet that they exist.
This is laughable, because this interoperability stuff is exactly what makes Microsoft an anti-competitive monopoly. I personally believe that since Linux tools like SAMBA and NTFS offer users means to access their own data, these should in no way be subject to claims of infringement. It's equivalent to selling a live-sustaining or life-saving medical device with a heavily DRMed, copy-protected switch that ONLY works under the conditions established by its manufacturer. This is serious enough to warrant consideration of logic that goes something like this..."you can have a monopoly, OR patented IP, but not both." There is simply too much at stake - especially with Microsoft's track record.
Patents, were, after all, designed to spur innovation, and the only way you can do that is to provide opportunities for other players in the market. You can't have other players if they can never quite get their foot in the door, fearing that they'll be sued into oblivion by monolithic, entrenched interests.
Or not. That's where over-extended credit and bankruptcy come in.
I believe that the minute a major network gets their hands on new talent, especially from the likes of YouTube or other vlogging community, it could very well end up in the removal of the elements that made the individual popular in the first place. Since their first priority is revenue, I'm convinced that they're likely to take whatever they get, and dumb it down to appeal to the widest possible audience. Therein lies the charm of YouTube et al. If you're not popular on YouTube, it's not YouTube's problem. YOU decide what to do about it, not the collective input of 10 managers at various levels of a corporate media company.
Although this sounds like a good idea, I don't think it would actually help. The major argument for the Bayh-Dole Act is that it gives universities an incentive to move patented discoveries into the applied realm where they may do some good; otherwise the patents languish underutilized.
I agree with your thoughts. In other words, the Bayh-Dole Act supposes that the only way a university can be inspired to get off its can and utilize its patents is if the taxpayers *pay* them to? What a load. It's a free market. If the universities want to let them go to waste, fine...but I don't feel it's in the taxpayers' interest or within their responsibility to engage in what is essentially a bribe. Talk about burning the candle at both ends...
I don't even think this applies- how often do you buy software that gives you an exclusive license?
I'll have to disagree...I'm not deriding them for using it, I'm deriding them because they've elected to substitute this "e-onics" English as the real thing.
Nice recap...
Right off, the first thing I see is a fixed-width format that takes up damn near most of my screen. Guess how often I'll be back. Try...oh....NEVER.
Vista is the long-awaited update of the Windows operating system
The only ones waiting for it are Microsoft - XP can only carry them for so long before new revenue streams need to be implemented to replace it.