Best Buy will tell you anything they can to sell you more high margin items. I know, I have worked for them both as a computer salesman (although PSP/Accessory salesman would be more appropriate - the computers sold themselves) and as a tech behind the bench.
You sound as if you have some knowledge on this subject. Care to enlighten us? I'd find that much more instructive than repeatedly calling the grandparent a dick head.
The phone is one of your personal effects. The line between your phone (or building, house, etc) and the phone of the person you are talking to is not one of your personal effects. A wiretapping is the searching of that line.
That being said, I do agree with the interpretation that phone calls are protected under the 4th amendment. It's just not so cut and dry as some would like to believe.
contrary to the article this doesn't void your dell guarantee.
It is not unheard of that Dell will attempt to tell you that loading a different operating system voids your warranty.
We spent a few weeks back in October getting my brother-in-law's laptop repaired under warranty, and it took a letter to the Better Business Bureau to convince Dell that installing Ubuntu on a laptop that originally came with Windows did not void the warranty. (yes, the letter actually had an effect...Dell became extremely cooperative after that)
I should add that I'm not apologizing for the woman, but, given that she knows as little as she does, not doing something that the manufacturer tells you will void your warranty is probably a good decision.
Ha. Ha ha. You'd be surprised what instances of profanity some of the people who would support this bill are concerned about. They don't want to hear me say "Goddammit" or "Fuck" when my team fucks up at a football game. They don't want to hear "aw shit" when I drop a bag of groceries and the milk explodes all over the parking lot. And they definitely don't want to have to listen to the type of people who feel the need to use fuck or shit every third word.
Yes, I grew up in South Carolina, I know these sorts of people, and yes they are indeed judgemental and self righteous. Fortunately, there are also sane people there, and most of the time they outnumber the religious radicals.
You make an excellent point and I realize that I should have worded that a bit differently. How about, "Buy some property that comes with some restrictions that you suit your needs and desires" ?
I had assumed it means that, 20 years down the line, when we realize a fetus should have been aborted, we can take necessary steps to do it "retroactively".
The whole thing is disgusting to me though. We're not living in any semblance of a free country when your neighbors can tell you what things you can and can't have on your property simply because they don't look pretty.
They don't. Most of the time, what you're referring to is the result of a homeowner's agreement. When you purchased the property, you agreed to work with your neighbors to establish rules about how things could be done in your neighborhood. This is beneficial to you because it helps to maintain your property values. Part of the reason that many people buy a house in a certain area is because there are things that they like about that area. Homeowners' associations exist to maintain the area like the people living there want it.
If you don't want your neighbors telling you what things you can and can't have on your property, then buy some property that doesn't come with restrictions. It exists, I promise. The neighborhoods may not be as nice, but hey...there might be a reason for that.
What about corded devices? Lamps, laptops, etc. I would love to be able to cut the cords to those. Sure, I would still run power in my house. To each room, to stationary devices along walls. But if I can use wireless power within the rooms, I see getting rid of the cords across the room as being great as a convenience factor - and also removes the tripping and pulling hazards.
Re:This will actually reverse the cost of health c
on
My Genome, My Self?
·
· Score: 1
How do I find a doctor like this? Are there labs with similar practices? What about things like Xrays, etc? I would love to use health insurance as actual insurance and not as a health plan - but to be honest, I don't know how to do that given the high prices of medical treatment (I agree that these are the result of the universal nature of HMOs and the AMA, but they're still a reality...). So...educate me - how do I do this?
A genuine question here - aren't there fit for purpose laws that already exist that could be applied to this? As in, I purchased this software, but it doesn't work satisfactorily (screws up my computer), so I get to return it.
So, the FTC should not allow me to purchase software that hides itself and makes it difficult or impossible to remove? What if I want this sort of software? What right does my government have keeping me from it. (Sure, I don't want it, but that doesn't mean my government should prevent me from buying it.)
It would seem more appropriate to me that the FTC requires the sellers of this sort of software to make it very clear that the software does these things.
Even if they had the money, some will see it as an unnecessary expense.
Good deal. An unnecessary expense means that you don't need the product. Otherwise it would be necessary. If it's an unnecessary expense, I don't see any reason that I should pay for it.
That didn't look to me like an argument that he wanted to copy a rented film - it looked like an explanation of why it better suited the providers to do it that way.
Personally, I want my TV to be a dumb display device because I want to be able to control the "experience". I would prefer to have my own "set top box" that runs my own software, consumes services that I pay for, and outputs to whatever sort of viewing device I choose (whether this is a TV, or my stereo, or my computer screen, or a projector, or some newfangled intercranial content delivery system).
Our stuff IS written to be cross-platform. We already support OSX. We can support Linux but why? The point is that there's no point in porting it, because the cost of supporting it would be too high, even if there was demand, which there isn't.
So...with or without Wine, I won't have linux support. However, with Wine, I actually stand a chance at getting a niche application to work in Linux, allowing me not to have to purchase and maintain an entire operating system solely to run one piece of niche software. It seems you're making it pretty obvious why Wine is valuable.
Don't get me wrong - I'm a big OSS advocate, I use OSS wherever I can, and have standardized on RedHat Linux for all of our infrastructure!
Me too. The "wherever I can" being the important part. With your niche application, OSS is not an option. However, without Wine, if I want to run your application, an OSS OS isn't even an option. With Wine, suddenly my "wherever I can" scope has grown larger.
We've extensively reviewed the idea of open sourcing our product, as well. But our product is a niche product, and there's really no point in releasing our wares to the world like that.
Quite understandable. If it's not worth the cost, I wouldn't expect you to do so. However, with Wine, your application becomes available to me (the guy without Windows or OSX) - which if I'm interested in your app is pretty important for me.
...none of those things are as much a precondition of successful terrorist action like photography in the Mumbai attacks.
I can guarantee you that if we ban (and are successful in enforcing the ban) eating and sleeping, we will prevent future terrorist attacks. I'd say those things are very much a precondition of a successful terrorist action - much more so than photographs.
There are times when people with the authority make the decision that civil liberties are less important than the safety of the masses and rightly so.
.... if a law enforcement official asked someone to....
Law enforcement is NOT the "people with the authority" to make this decision. We have a group of people who make laws. Lay enforcement's job is to enforce existing laws, not to make up new ones.
Slashdot Mirror
Thank you for that - I wasn't crazy about the funny mod - wasn't meant to be funny at all.
Best Buy will tell you anything they can to sell you more high margin items. I know, I have worked for them both as a computer salesman (although PSP/Accessory salesman would be more appropriate - the computers sold themselves) and as a tech behind the bench.
You sound as if you have some knowledge on this subject. Care to enlighten us? I'd find that much more instructive than repeatedly calling the grandparent a dick head.
The phone is one of your personal effects. The line between your phone (or building, house, etc) and the phone of the person you are talking to is not one of your personal effects. A wiretapping is the searching of that line.
That being said, I do agree with the interpretation that phone calls are protected under the 4th amendment. It's just not so cut and dry as some would like to believe.
I've always thought that Idiocracy was an insightful and predictive documentary - it's just too bad that it's such a bad movie.
contrary to the article this doesn't void your dell guarantee.
It is not unheard of that Dell will attempt to tell you that loading a different operating system voids your warranty.
We spent a few weeks back in October getting my brother-in-law's laptop repaired under warranty, and it took a letter to the Better Business Bureau to convince Dell that installing Ubuntu on a laptop that originally came with Windows did not void the warranty. (yes, the letter actually had an effect...Dell became extremely cooperative after that)
I should add that I'm not apologizing for the woman, but, given that she knows as little as she does, not doing something that the manufacturer tells you will void your warranty is probably a good decision.
Ha.
Ha ha.
You'd be surprised what instances of profanity some of the people who would support this bill are concerned about. They don't want to hear me say "Goddammit" or "Fuck" when my team fucks up at a football game. They don't want to hear "aw shit" when I drop a bag of groceries and the milk explodes all over the parking lot. And they definitely don't want to have to listen to the type of people who feel the need to use fuck or shit every third word.
Yes, I grew up in South Carolina, I know these sorts of people, and yes they are indeed judgemental and self righteous. Fortunately, there are also sane people there, and most of the time they outnumber the religious radicals.
Then how about from the 14th:
"No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States;"
This specifically addresses both making and enforcing a law. And no, they can't make any law they want.
You make an excellent point and I realize that I should have worded that a bit differently. How about, "Buy some property that comes with some restrictions that you suit your needs and desires" ?
Fair enough.
I had assumed it means that, 20 years down the line, when we realize a fetus should have been aborted, we can take necessary steps to do it "retroactively".
So...it's not economically feasible to have a family right now, but it is to have a 7500 sq ft house for one person?
The whole thing is disgusting to me though. We're not living in any semblance of a free country when your neighbors can tell you what things you can and can't have on your property simply because they don't look pretty.
They don't. Most of the time, what you're referring to is the result of a homeowner's agreement. When you purchased the property, you agreed to work with your neighbors to establish rules about how things could be done in your neighborhood. This is beneficial to you because it helps to maintain your property values. Part of the reason that many people buy a house in a certain area is because there are things that they like about that area. Homeowners' associations exist to maintain the area like the people living there want it.
If you don't want your neighbors telling you what things you can and can't have on your property, then buy some property that doesn't come with restrictions. It exists, I promise. The neighborhoods may not be as nice, but hey...there might be a reason for that.
Also the plugs. And how often you have to plug and unplug them.
What about corded devices? Lamps, laptops, etc. I would love to be able to cut the cords to those. Sure, I would still run power in my house. To each room, to stationary devices along walls. But if I can use wireless power within the rooms, I see getting rid of the cords across the room as being great as a convenience factor - and also removes the tripping and pulling hazards.
How do I find a doctor like this? Are there labs with similar practices? What about things like Xrays, etc? I would love to use health insurance as actual insurance and not as a health plan - but to be honest, I don't know how to do that given the high prices of medical treatment (I agree that these are the result of the universal nature of HMOs and the AMA, but they're still a reality...). So...educate me - how do I do this?
A genuine question here - aren't there fit for purpose laws that already exist that could be applied to this? As in, I purchased this software, but it doesn't work satisfactorily (screws up my computer), so I get to return it.
So, the FTC should not allow me to purchase software that hides itself and makes it difficult or impossible to remove? What if I want this sort of software? What right does my government have keeping me from it. (Sure, I don't want it, but that doesn't mean my government should prevent me from buying it.)
It would seem more appropriate to me that the FTC requires the sellers of this sort of software to make it very clear that the software does these things.
Now take that and try to raise a family.
Or don't. If you don't have the skills necessary to provide for a family, attempting to raise one is a horrible idea.
Even if they had the money, some will see it as an unnecessary expense.
Good deal. An unnecessary expense means that you don't need the product. Otherwise it would be necessary. If it's an unnecessary expense, I don't see any reason that I should pay for it.
How about the commercials on the cable channels?
That didn't look to me like an argument that he wanted to copy a rented film - it looked like an explanation of why it better suited the providers to do it that way.
Personally, I want my TV to be a dumb display device because I want to be able to control the "experience". I would prefer to have my own "set top box" that runs my own software, consumes services that I pay for, and outputs to whatever sort of viewing device I choose (whether this is a TV, or my stereo, or my computer screen, or a projector, or some newfangled intercranial content delivery system).
Our stuff IS written to be cross-platform. We already support OSX. We can support Linux but why? The point is that there's no point in porting it, because the cost of supporting it would be too high, even if there was demand, which there isn't.
So...with or without Wine, I won't have linux support. However, with Wine, I actually stand a chance at getting a niche application to work in Linux, allowing me not to have to purchase and maintain an entire operating system solely to run one piece of niche software. It seems you're making it pretty obvious why Wine is valuable.
Don't get me wrong - I'm a big OSS advocate, I use OSS wherever I can, and have standardized on RedHat Linux for all of our infrastructure!
Me too. The "wherever I can" being the important part. With your niche application, OSS is not an option. However, without Wine, if I want to run your application, an OSS OS isn't even an option. With Wine, suddenly my "wherever I can" scope has grown larger.
We've extensively reviewed the idea of open sourcing our product, as well. But our product is a niche product, and there's really no point in releasing our wares to the world like that.
Quite understandable. If it's not worth the cost, I wouldn't expect you to do so. However, with Wine, your application becomes available to me (the guy without Windows or OSX) - which if I'm interested in your app is pretty important for me.
...none of those things are as much a precondition of successful terrorist action like photography in the Mumbai attacks.
I can guarantee you that if we ban (and are successful in enforcing the ban) eating and sleeping, we will prevent future terrorist attacks. I'd say those things are very much a precondition of a successful terrorist action - much more so than photographs.
There are times when people with the authority make the decision that civil liberties are less important than the safety of the masses and rightly so.
.... if a law enforcement official asked someone to ....
Law enforcement is NOT the "people with the authority" to make this decision. We have a group of people who make laws. Lay enforcement's job is to enforce existing laws, not to make up new ones.