What about asubusiness.com? That's registered to the Arizona State University College of Business. Mesacommunitycollege.com is registered to the Maricopa County Community College District.
I can't think of any other examples off hand as I no longer work in academia, but the point is nothing prevents educational institutions from registering.com's. I've talked to a number of people who still think all website addresses end in.com. Moreover, given.com's popularity and ease of registration, I can see colleges and departments within other.edu's getting their own.com for their own website.
The LSU School of Law might be just such an organisation. lsulaw.com is a domain some people might want on their business cards as opposed to law.lsu.edu.
Slightly OT, but... I'm almost positive this site is illegal in the United States. As I understand it, schools recieving federal funding (like LSU) have to make their websites accessible to disabled students. I can't even get into law.lsu.edu as I don't have Flash, and that's ridiculous.
Anybody have more information regarding this federal regulation?
It's what the domain implies. Slashdot started off as a.org, as it didn't fit any of the other available TLD's. Granted, it grew out of its humble beginnings, but I digress.
Which brings up a point: He never states his intent. He says what he's doing with it now is non-commercial, but he certainly has the correct domain if lsulaw.com ever grew into something he feels he would want to make a profit off of. Just something to think about.
Look at it this way: If you saw just the domain lsulaw.com, what would you think the site was about? If you saw the domain lsulaw.org, would you think it was the same?
I'd think lsulaw.com was a site that had something to do with LSU's law school, which it is, and I'd presume it was ran by the school itself, not a student. I'd think lsulaw.org would be an organisation associated with, but not ran by LSU. Maybe an organisation of law students and alumni. I don't know. I can't be certain having seen the site.
LSU's asking him to surrender the domain name, as I understand it by reading request #1 of the cease and desist letter. I think they just want the domain for themselves.
This Cease and Desist Letter was sent to him 30 November 2001. He responded within a few days, and seven weeks later he was threatened with a lawsuit on 11 February 2002. He responded to that on 04 March 2002, and they finally served him on 20 April 2002.
The new york times article indicates he recieved the cease and desist letter and the trademark infringement suit "last month, two days before his second-year final exams." Poppycock. He's had six months to work this out.
According to the cease and desist letter--yes--one was actually sent, the actual LSU law school "has already reported certain instances of confusion caused to students who did not realise that [the] LSULAW.com site was not an official or affiliated website of the LSU Law Center." A two-point disclaimer at the bottom is obviously not pointing out to some students that the site is unofficial.
Moreover, the CAD letter indicates he has recently identified his website as "the official site of LSULAW.com." An "official" designation of his site seems to further misrepresent his site.
Maybe if he changed his domain to lsulaw.org (which would still not satisfy LSU according to the CAD letter)... if his site is truly non-commercial, he should use.org anyway.
$1.2 billion? Do you have any idea how much of an insignificant figure this is, especially when the US government is involved?
According to this google result, airline losses could top $10 billion, actual physical tamage is estimated at $25 billion, Bush is still talking about a $75 billion economic stimulus plan (tho support for this is fading fast), the arilines got a $15 billion bailout package, and that doesn't even begin to cover the Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt that was cast upon this nation the instant the planes hit the towers, which I've read at I think $50 billion for maybe NYC alone. Results aren't clear of this, and it's all speculation and estimating regardless. But the Consumer Confidence Index, a widely respected barometer of how willing consumers are to actually spend money, plummet to its lowest level in seven years.
Your comparison of bin Laden to Star Wars is offbase, and I'm a bit offended by your gross underestimates.:P
Groening's talk of making an Enron episode reminds me of how low the Simpsons have sunk. Who, five years from now, is going to remember Enron?
Homer: Oh, little Lisa. I've already started you a college fund at Lincoln Savings and Loan.
But seriously, how long have the Simpsons been on? 10 years now? How many episodes are out? 200? 250? Does anybody even know, my Krusty-brand Kalkulator doesn't even go that high.:> But you try keeping a show on for ten years and manage to have a unique episode on each week. They're looking for ideas, and I quite frankly think it's a darn good avenue to look at that whole debacle.
The idiocy of everyone involved in that clusterfuck who really made jackasses of themselves is incredible, and starving employees aside, I think that's funny.
Make that 95% of the time when a Linux user says "Linux" they really mean "Unix". The other 5% of the time they're referring to an aspect that only applies to their particular distribution.
Nugget's Law: 5% of the time when a Linux user says "Linux" they really mean "Unix". The other 5% of the time they're referring to an aspect that only applies to their particular distribution.
I'd love to check out this ISO book to see what they say for display readability... but the ISOcharges 104 Swiss Francs for a 28-page electronic version.
That's US$63.18. I'll pass. Anybody know of where to get these documents free?
AT&T just began a 5-1 stock reverse split. First time in its history and the first for a DOW component. That's something that soon-to-be-delisted dot-coms do. Not DOW components.
You forget that stock value is just one barometer of measuring a company's strength. AT&T's stock is among the most widely held in America, with 3.545 BILLION shares outstanding as of 01 April 2002.
According to this, AT&T employs 117,800 people, has massive properties (dialup, broadband, long distance...) No dotgone ever had this magnitude. Plus the Gartner Group is wrong in their assessment of AT&T's future; they've been going under some restructuring in the past couple years and restructuring a company of AT&T's girth doesn't happen overnight.
Lastly, you get delisted from the NASDAQ or NYSE if your stock hovers below $1.00 for a while. AT&T currently trades at $13.75.
I don't know about Sprint, but when I called up Voicestream and bitched about the poor signal strength in my area, they eventually peered with a junior high a mile away from me and replaced one of their light towers with a cell/light tower combo. Call them up and they might actually listen to you. Having dead spots in their coverage area is bad for business.
Let's debunk this six-type argument, shall we... Six types, Analog, GSM1900, TDMA800, TDMA1900, CDMA800, and CDMA1900. Try and actually find a phone that was made in the last three or four years that actually supports just one type. (excluding some Nokia models made for prepay services like Tracfone). My dad has a piece of crap Audiovox 800 MHz/analog phone from like five years ago that works everywhere. Try and find a phone that you would actually want to use that doesn't support CDMA or TDMA at both frequencies as well as analog fallback. They're hard to find.
I occasionally got dropped calls with AT&T and VoiceStream, but at least AT&T offered a 50c/drop credit on my bill. I also don't have the environmental factors you do... tall buildings of NYC I'm sure have some detrimental effect on cell service, whereas where I am, even a three story building is a rare sight to behold.
My point is, it's not exactly fair to judge a whole service network based on what you get in one area. If you were in some part of europe where 40-story buildings were all over (do they even have those in europe), would Orange or OpTel or Vodafone or Deutsche Telekom never drop your call? I doubt it. Would said companies be doing a far superior job than Sprint if they had to provide service in NYC? Probably not.
better coverage than 25 services sharing 1 universal service type.
Well... I'm not having the coverage issues of which you speak, and I'm still not convinced that just one is best.
I'll ignore your blatant trolls about Americans not educating themselves about products, but I will say this: Voicestream sucks. Their service is horrendous, their customer support sucks, and just because they're a GSM provider doesn't make them absolutely superior to everything else. There are many more barometers to cell service quality other than the multiplexing protocol they use. A vast majority of americans don't give a rat's ass about that.
For one thing, CDMA offers a far, far higher capacity than GSM. While I'll agree that GSM has better voice quality, CDMA providers are far cheaper. In my part of the USA, you can get unlimited calling with Cricket for US$32.95/mo with no credit checks or contracts. Cricket uses CDMA, and this sort of value would be impossible with GSM.
Moreover, a vast majority of americans live within metropolitan areas, where there is digital service (as well as long interstate highways), which is all fine and good. I'd rather pay for service that'll work where I am, not wherever Joe BFE decides to live. Besides, there's analog coverage over about 99% of the mainland US.
... because YOUR company doesn't have a Cell tower there, because every company has thier own
system....
Erm. You need to learn about interconnection agreements. Qwest (a western United States provider) has an interconnection agreement with Alltel, a national provider. Qwest will hop on Alltel's network where Qwest towers don't exist. These agreements are fairly common in the United States. Also, every company does not have their own system. The only single-carrier system I can think of is Nextel, a specialised business-targetted provider. AT&T, Cingular, Alaska Wireless use TDMA. Alltel, Qwest, Verizon, Airtouch, Cricket, Sprint, and probably a few more all use CDMA. Voicestream, Pac-Bell, and certain chunks of Cingular also use GSM.
Multiple systems are actually better for the customer. Nextel phones can be used like walkie-talkies, Cricket takes advantage of CDMA's cell-hopping and capacity technologies to offer a fabulous service.
And lastly, New York City? Bah. Your trolls phase me not.
Saying that people should get a lawyer before installing software is ridiculous.
My initial comment was originally posted a bit tongue in cheek, but if you hit "I Agree" and you don't agree nor make any attempt to understand what you agree, that's not the fault of the company. If you hit "I Agree," you'd better agree.
Why aren't you thinking? Any lawyer worth his or her salt would look at any EULA, and tell you not to install the software.
Lawyers provide legal advice and break down the legal process for the average person. If I wanted to incorporate a business or get married, the lawyer would look at the forms I have to sign, and tell me what it is I'm signing. They don't say, "This form's too hard. Why are you wasting your time getting married anyway?" Lawyers are not just binary evaluators that say Do this/Don't do this and stop at that.
>I know what I have installed on my computer, I know what it does, and I don't get surprised when I do (pkg_info|dpkg -l).
Do you seriously expect anyone to believe you when you say this? I can guarantee that you do NOT know exactly what you have on your computer.
Uhh, I would say a lot of people who have been running BSD/Linux for a while could agree with this statement.
Your pkg_info paragraph is way off-base. I didn't say I know exactly what I have installed, but I have a fair understanding of what each program does based on what the author of the program has written about it. This is reinforced because a) I can trust the author as he or she is most likely not part of some greedy business and don't stoop to unethical behavior to match a profit margin, b) a vast majority of the software I have is open-sourced, and especially that which is in the FreeBSD base has gone through a fair amount of auditing, whereas Kazaa is a closed-source app that has probably not recieved any comprehensive security analysis, and c) if there were issues, I'd be alerted about them immediately as I'm seeing more 3rd-party auditors more interested in keeping whatever UNIX software secure rather than some silly windows utility.
If the trojans of which you speak are delivered by some cracker, than it's my fault for not keeping up to date on patches. If the trojans are delivered by the author, a highly unlikely event especially with a commonplace app like ftp, that author would essentially be commiting developmental suicide as I and many others wouldn't use software from this author anymore. I do not expect this level of quality in Windows.
Wouldn't you be pissed if it did? But, as you suggest, you only have yourself to blame.
I sure would be, and yup, I'd blame myself. I'm glad that we see eye to eye on this issue, and it's settled.:P
Besides, Kazaa alerted its users to some extent, and that's the whole point of this damn thread. Your questions of my knowledge of trojanned software is wholly irrelevant as trojans by definition are totally silent about their duality. And no 'Well, the obfuscation of the EULA sections on spyware is analogous to a trojanned program' because I don't see rootkits coming with click-through agreements that the legitimate sysadmin has to click "I Agree." to step through the installation process.
Gee, you can dog me on my misuse of the word altruism but when it comes to trojan, you're the one in the dark...:)
If one local store started making you sign a EULA to shop there, I'd stop shopping there, but if they ALL started doing it then what choice do you have? It's at that point that legal protections are the balancing factor.
At that point, one store could of course come up and have you sign no EULA or perhaps one that is comprehensible by Agnes End-Shopper. And this Store will reign Supreme o'er Stores that confuse their Shoppers, demonstrating once again the Power of Capitalism. That is, until the other stores realise the idiocy of their moves and abolish the EULA or work something else out entirely.
Which brings me to my next point: Companies that do stupid things (like Kazaa is doing now) ultimately pay the price for their idiocy (Enron, et. al.) and either change their policies accordingly or nothing happens, proving that their userbase might just not care about what's going on with their own software. Never underestimate the apathy of people, and don't gauge their concern on what a vocal minority says.
And Kazaa is learning, but nowhere in this story do I see the following quote from Kazaa's front page about their "new pledge."
Your privacy is important to us. Read this
easy overview of the things we are working on to make what you do on the Net your business.
If you don't understand the EULA of the software, don't install it. Who's forcing you to put this software on your computer?
Besides, shouldn't some warning bell be going off in your head if the legalese in the EULA is overly obfuscated?
Ask yourself: What else could this incoherent block of text mean other than what am I inferring it to be? What are the Company's interests in my installing the Software? What is the ulterior motive? What did I just read? What is the point of each and every single section of text?
They post a EULA. If you can't read a EULA, get a lawyer or learn legalese. People need to take responsibility for themselves, and people ultimately need to be accountable for the software they install on their computer. It'll be a cold day in hell and a dark day on the surface if some judge ruled in favor of the plaintiff if anybody sued over this.
This is actually a good idea: Kazaa provides a free service for its users and a free download, and in exchange for this the users give up some CPU time. Maybe you all who think everything on the Internet should be for free (*glare at T(H)GSB*) should take your altruism back to 1999.
If you don't know what software does, don't install it. I know what I have installed on my computer, I know what it does, and I don't get surprised when I do (pkg_info|dpkg -l).
My favorite part from the article: "76 percent of respondents said they were "concerned" about having their privacy violated on the Internet. Only 22 percent admitted to reading privacy policies." No comment, this quote speaks for itself.
The 1040EZ is less of a read than the EULA? I should hope so. That's not even saying much.
1) I don't need an LCD screen. They're too expensive, I can't get a 17" one that does 1280x1024 without selling a kidney. But I can get a 17" CRT for like $90. And yes, it's beige. I can deal with beige.
2) I don't need a DVD burner. Nor do I need a CDRW. Nor do I need a Superdrive that does both. I never burn CD's. I have no need to. I have 100 Mbit switched running throughout the house and all my friends have cable or DSL. I have one computer with a DVD drive. Why would I/ever/ burn DVD's? They're expensive and overrated.
2) I buy hardware based on its expandability and what I can do with it, not because of its footprint or form factor or its industrial design or whatever. One of my computers has its parts strewn about on a shelf in the open air. Having to pay extra for non-standard, non-interchangable components is just a bad idea.
3) Does your new imac have even a PCI slot or a 5.25" drive bay? What can I do with this machine? The aforementioned computer has three hard drives and I interchange between a tape drive, a CDR, and DVDR based on what I need to do with it. I have that capability with my computer.
4) I have seen the following monitor connections on a mac: 13W3, HDB15, DB15, HDI45, HDI14, digital flat panel, and now mini-vga. MAKE UP YOUR DAMN MIND ALREADY! I should be able to buy hardware without spending money on $20 dongles. I've seen about ten different card interface connections. Hardware I buy should be, there's that word again, interchaagable. This is just obnxious and stupid.
You guys need to learn that while there are certain technologies that are great and cool and neat, I don't want them shoved down my throat. You need to learn that the strength of the computer lies within its a' la' carte capability. I pick and choose what I want based on what I need to do with it. While my previous assertations are definitely in a very tiny minority, this one is: People buy computers based on what they want to do with them, not what you want them to. Make and license an ATX board with PCI slots, AGP or onboard video
If you do not learn this your market share will suffer accordingly.
PCS is NOT a frequency variant of GSM. PCS (Personal Communication Services) is the FCC definition for digital wireless services at the 1900 MHz bandwith range. This includes CDMA, TDMA, and GSM which run in North America at 1900 MHz as opposed to 800 MHz most everywhere else.
The problem here is not Europe being technologically superior the United States, but the fact that their mobile systems run at GSM 900 and 1800 MHz. GSM in the united states is exclusively 1900 MHz.
That being said, Nokia et. al. could easily retool their 800/1800 MHz GSM phones to work at 1900 MHz, but that's just part of the problem. Nokia doesn't sell directly to the consumer, and support is left to the provider, whose customers have a tendency to be more idiotic than their european counterparts.
Providers here have a hard enough time trying to teach Sally Chatterbox and Joe AOL how to use their digital phones, and here you have the other reason why you're not likely to see these kinds of mass-marketed advanced phones here.
Mommy, mommy the slashdotters are after me!:) Harsh is the last thing I'd think this post was and I have better things to do than get flamed on a weblog.
...I assume anything that comes on 3.5" disks fits your description
Why? The software I got to replace it, Phone Manager [oxygensoftware.com] could also have fitted onto a floppy disk.
I'm splitting hairs here, but comes on and fits on are two different things. Lots of good software could fit on a 3.5" disk, but if it comes on one in 2002 I'm under the impression that it's just old simply because it comes on a floppy disk. CD-ROM's indicate a level of technology that's post 1996.
we're a long way from the first generation phones - they appeared in the eighties.
And speaking of 1996, I meant first generation digital. By US standards, your first generation digital that you dealt with in the early 1990's is what we played with just a couple years ago. My 5190 came out in ~1996 or thereabouts but I got it new in 2000, and it cost me US$50.
Why? Well, most phones I've ever tried have been poor. Poor build quality...
I don't know which phones you've used, but I've found Nokia's industrial design to be absolutely top-notch. I've dropped one of their ubiquitous 5100 series from great heights, and the thing bounces back like a tennis ball ready for more torture. They're built like tanks--I've opened them up and marveled at the strength of the guts inside.
particularly in regard to securing the battery connection.
Tape it if it's broken. How often do you swap batteries? Lithium ion batteries last for hours and I used to carry around a charger in my pack and charge it where I found it convenient.
OK, so the 'lock keypad' function is used to get round one of those moans.
Which would you rather have? A flip-phone? Ever seen the ear part of the flip after it's been caught in a car door and bent 45-degrees backward? Phone engineers have to deal with the rigors of the environments in which their phones will be used. I'd much rather have to key in Menu Button, * than deal with a flimsy piece of plastic that could just easily break off.
... and the PC Suite [nokia.com] for it is hopelessly out of date and utterly useless.
I've never used PC Suite, but I assume anything that comes on 3.5" disks fits your description, and nor would it surprise me. My solution: Don't use it. Gnokii is an incredibly done application and served me quite well for the few months I had my 5190.
I'd sacrifice the entire lot for an industrial design that works as a basic phone without falling apart.
I think it's a tad premature to discount next-generation technology phones based on inexperiences with the myopic designs of the first generation series phones. Nokia, et. al. designed the 5190 and the 8850 to be talked on first, SMS'd with second. I would hope Nokia has overcome these interface issues with their more advanced phones as they come out.
It's totally moot to me--I won't see any of these phones for a long, long time as Nokia barely caters to the US market outside of AT&T Wireless's desires--a company I'd rather not deal with again.
The United States is withdrawing from the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty because the language in it prevents the signer nations from developing missile-defense anti-nuke shields. The theory was back in 1973 that if one nation had this technology, they could fire their nukes on another nation and be spared from the concept of mutually assured destruction, (MAD) the idea that if you fire one nuke, you essentially end the world.
The problem with the Test Ban Treaty is that it was written in a different era. Hopefully the events of 11 September indicates to you that there are more than enough people more than willing to kill themselves to inflict as much destruction on the United States as possible.
MAD doesn't work as an effective deterrent when your enemy is willing to die to kill you.
I saw a History Channel tagline that referenced nuclear weapons in the most relevant way: "Weapons so powerful, their mere existence implies 'Peace, or else.'"
This may be straying a bit off-topic here, but what if we hadn't developed the nuke? How many allied and Japanese forces would have died in the invasion of Japan had we not dropped the bomb? 125,000 civillian casualties in Hiroshima and Nagasaki pales in comparison to the amount of possible casualties. The USA estimates 1,000,000 allied casulties in such an invasion, maybe times that by 5 to get the number of Japanese killed.
Remember. Nukes suck. But they're the better than the alternative. However, straying back on topic... how do they know this simulation is accurate?
P.S. If you disagree, don't moderate, reply.
Re:Then MarsHydro could become a reality...?
on
Lots of Ice On Mars
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Not likely, if you look at the deal with moon rocks which is another example of NASA missing out on lost commercial opportunity.
From this Google result: A sample of lunar dust, weighing only a few milligrams, sold at a Superior Galleries auction in California in 1993 for $42,500 (Final Frontier, May/June 1993, p6). A short while later, a sale of Russian lunar samples took place in New York at a Southeby's auction. An estimated one carat rock fragment sold for a record $442,000 (Final Frontier, March/April, 1994, pp. 58-61)
Couple this with policy gathered from the NASA Office of Inspector General (OIG): "Moon rocks gathered by the Apollo missions are considered national treasures and cannot be privately owned or sold." (OIG's New Reports Dec 1999.)
Sure, MarsHydro is a good idea. But look at NASA's failure to capitalise on the moon-rock market. Not gonna happen with this NASA. Oh well.
yet another argument for the privitasation of NASA. Oh well.
Passed (but struck down by the US Supreme Court (wooo! score one for Checks and Balances!)) overwhelmingly by the Senate in 1996. It's later version, dubbed The Son of CDA arrived in 1998 and was passed, but that was struck down
Slashdot Mirror
What about asubusiness.com? That's registered to the Arizona State University College of Business. Mesacommunitycollege.com is registered to the Maricopa County Community College District.
.com's. I've talked to a number of people who still think all website addresses end in .com. Moreover, given .com's popularity and ease of registration, I can see colleges and departments within other .edu's getting their own .com for their own website.
I can't think of any other examples off hand as I no longer work in academia, but the point is nothing prevents educational institutions from registering
The LSU School of Law might be just such an organisation. lsulaw.com is a domain some people might want on their business cards as opposed to law.lsu.edu.
Slightly OT, but ... I'm almost positive this site is illegal in the United States. As I understand it, schools recieving federal funding (like LSU) have to make their websites accessible to disabled students. I can't even get into law.lsu.edu as I don't have Flash, and that's ridiculous.
Anybody have more information regarding this federal regulation?
It's what the domain implies. Slashdot started off as a .org, as it didn't fit any of the other available TLD's. Granted, it grew out of its humble beginnings, but I digress.
Which brings up a point: He never states his intent. He says what he's doing with it now is non-commercial, but he certainly has the correct domain if lsulaw.com ever grew into something he feels he would want to make a profit off of. Just something to think about.
Look at it this way: If you saw just the domain lsulaw.com, what would you think the site was about? If you saw the domain lsulaw.org, would you think it was the same?
I'd think lsulaw.com was a site that had something to do with LSU's law school, which it is, and I'd presume it was ran by the school itself, not a student. I'd think lsulaw.org would be an organisation associated with, but not ran by LSU. Maybe an organisation of law students and alumni. I don't know. I can't be certain having seen the site.
LSU's asking him to surrender the domain name, as I understand it by reading request #1 of the cease and desist letter. I think they just want the domain for themselves.
If you disagree, reply.
This Cease and Desist Letter was sent to him 30 November 2001. He responded within a few days, and seven weeks later he was threatened with a lawsuit on 11 February 2002. He responded to that on 04 March 2002, and they finally served him on 20 April 2002.
The new york times article indicates he recieved the cease and desist letter and the trademark infringement suit "last month, two days before his second-year final exams." Poppycock. He's had six months to work this out.
According to the cease and desist letter--yes--one was actually sent, the actual LSU law school "has already reported certain instances of confusion caused to students who did not realise that [the] LSULAW.com site was not an official or affiliated website of the LSU Law Center." A two-point disclaimer at the bottom is obviously not pointing out to some students that the site is unofficial.
... if his site is truly non-commercial, he should use .org anyway.
Moreover, the CAD letter indicates he has recently identified his website as "the official site of LSULAW.com." An "official" designation of his site seems to further misrepresent his site.
Maybe if he changed his domain to lsulaw.org (which would still not satisfy LSU according to the CAD letter)
If you disagree, reply.
$1.2 billion? Do you have any idea how much of an insignificant figure this is, especially when the US government is involved?
:P
According to this google result, airline losses could top $10 billion, actual physical tamage is estimated at $25 billion, Bush is still talking about a $75 billion economic stimulus plan (tho support for this is fading fast), the arilines got a $15 billion bailout package, and that doesn't even begin to cover the Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt that was cast upon this nation the instant the planes hit the towers, which I've read at I think $50 billion for maybe NYC alone. Results aren't clear of this, and it's all speculation and estimating regardless. But the Consumer Confidence Index, a widely respected barometer of how willing consumers are to actually spend money, plummet to its lowest level in seven years.
Your comparison of bin Laden to Star Wars is offbase, and I'm a bit offended by your gross underestimates.
If you disagree, reply.
Groening's talk of making an Enron episode reminds me of how low the Simpsons have sunk. Who, five years from now, is going to remember Enron?
:> But you try keeping a show on for ten years and manage to have a unique episode on each week. They're looking for ideas, and I quite frankly think it's a darn good avenue to look at that whole debacle.
Homer: Oh, little Lisa. I've already started you a college fund at Lincoln Savings and Loan.
But seriously, how long have the Simpsons been on? 10 years now? How many episodes are out? 200? 250? Does anybody even know, my Krusty-brand Kalkulator doesn't even go that high.
The idiocy of everyone involved in that clusterfuck who really made jackasses of themselves is incredible, and starving employees aside, I think that's funny.
If you disagree, reply.
Make that 95% of the time when a Linux user says "Linux" they really mean "Unix". The other 5% of the time they're referring to an aspect that only applies to their particular distribution.
I can't win.
Nugget's Law: 5% of the time when a Linux user says "Linux" they really mean "Unix". The other 5% of the time they're referring to an aspect that only applies to their particular distribution.
Nuff said.
I'd love to check out this ISO book to see what they say for display readability ... but the ISO charges 104 Swiss Francs for a 28-page electronic version.
That's US$63.18. I'll pass. Anybody know of where to get these documents free?
AT&T just began a 5-1 stock reverse split. First time in its history and the first for a DOW component. That's something that soon-to-be-delisted dot-coms do. Not DOW components.
...) No dotgone ever had this magnitude. Plus the Gartner Group is wrong in their assessment of AT&T's future; they've been going under some restructuring in the past couple years and restructuring a company of AT&T's girth doesn't happen overnight.
You forget that stock value is just one barometer of measuring a company's strength. AT&T's stock is among the most widely held in America, with 3.545 BILLION shares outstanding as of 01 April 2002.
According to this, AT&T employs 117,800 people, has massive properties (dialup, broadband, long distance
Lastly, you get delisted from the NASDAQ or NYSE if your stock hovers below $1.00 for a while. AT&T currently trades at $13.75.
I don't know about Sprint, but when I called up Voicestream and bitched about the poor signal strength in my area, they eventually peered with a junior high a mile away from me and replaced one of their light towers with a cell/light tower combo. Call them up and they might actually listen to you. Having dead spots in their coverage area is bad for business.
... I'm not having the coverage issues of which you speak, and I'm still not convinced that just one is best.
Let's debunk this six-type argument, shall we...
Six types, Analog, GSM1900, TDMA800, TDMA1900, CDMA800, and CDMA1900. Try and actually find a phone that was made in the last three or four years that actually supports just one type. (excluding some Nokia models made for prepay services like Tracfone). My dad has a piece of crap Audiovox 800 MHz/analog phone from like five years ago that works everywhere. Try and find a phone that you would actually want to use that doesn't support CDMA or TDMA at both frequencies as well as analog fallback. They're hard to find.
I occasionally got dropped calls with AT&T and VoiceStream, but at least AT&T offered a 50c/drop credit on my bill. I also don't have the environmental factors you do... tall buildings of NYC I'm sure have some detrimental effect on cell service, whereas where I am, even a three story building is a rare sight to behold.
My point is, it's not exactly fair to judge a whole service network based on what you get in one area. If you were in some part of europe where 40-story buildings were all over (do they even have those in europe), would Orange or OpTel or Vodafone or Deutsche Telekom never drop your call? I doubt it. Would said companies be doing a far superior job than Sprint if they had to provide service in NYC? Probably not.
better coverage than 25 services sharing 1 universal service type.
Well
I'll ignore your blatant trolls about Americans not educating themselves about products, but I will say this: Voicestream sucks. Their service is horrendous, their customer support sucks, and just because they're a GSM provider doesn't make them absolutely superior to everything else. There are many more barometers to cell service quality other than the multiplexing protocol they use. A vast majority of americans don't give a rat's ass about that.
... because YOUR company doesn't have a Cell tower there, because every company has thier own
For one thing, CDMA offers a far, far higher capacity than GSM. While I'll agree that GSM has better voice quality, CDMA providers are far cheaper. In my part of the USA, you can get unlimited calling with Cricket for US$32.95/mo with no credit checks or contracts. Cricket uses CDMA, and this sort of value would be impossible with GSM.
Moreover, a vast majority of americans live within metropolitan areas, where there is digital service (as well as long interstate highways), which is all fine and good. I'd rather pay for service that'll work where I am, not wherever Joe BFE decides to live. Besides, there's analog coverage over about 99% of the mainland US.
system....
Erm. You need to learn about interconnection agreements. Qwest (a western United States provider) has an interconnection agreement with Alltel, a national provider. Qwest will hop on Alltel's network where Qwest towers don't exist. These agreements are fairly common in the United States. Also, every company does not have their own system. The only single-carrier system I can think of is Nextel, a specialised business-targetted provider. AT&T, Cingular, Alaska Wireless use TDMA. Alltel, Qwest, Verizon, Airtouch, Cricket, Sprint, and probably a few more all use CDMA. Voicestream, Pac-Bell, and certain chunks of Cingular also use GSM.
Multiple systems are actually better for the customer. Nextel phones can be used like walkie-talkies, Cricket takes advantage of CDMA's cell-hopping and capacity technologies to offer a fabulous service.
And lastly, New York City? Bah. Your trolls phase me not.
Saying that people should get a lawyer before installing software is ridiculous.
:P
... :)
My initial comment was originally posted a bit tongue in cheek, but if you hit "I Agree" and you don't agree nor make any attempt to understand what you agree, that's not the fault of the company. If you hit "I Agree," you'd better agree.
Why aren't you thinking? Any lawyer worth his or her salt would look at any EULA, and tell you not to install the software.
Lawyers provide legal advice and break down the legal process for the average person. If I wanted to incorporate a business or get married, the lawyer would look at the forms I have to sign, and tell me what it is I'm signing. They don't say, "This form's too hard. Why are you wasting your time getting married anyway?" Lawyers are not just binary evaluators that say Do this/Don't do this and stop at that.
>I know what I have installed on my computer, I know what it does, and I don't get surprised when I do (pkg_info|dpkg -l).
Do you seriously expect anyone to believe you when you say this? I can guarantee that you do NOT know exactly what you have on your computer.
Uhh, I would say a lot of people who have been running BSD/Linux for a while could agree with this statement.
Your pkg_info paragraph is way off-base. I didn't say I know exactly what I have installed, but I have a fair understanding of what each program does based on what the author of the program has written about it. This is reinforced because a) I can trust the author as he or she is most likely not part of some greedy business and don't stoop to unethical behavior to match a profit margin, b) a vast majority of the software I have is open-sourced, and especially that which is in the FreeBSD base has gone through a fair amount of auditing, whereas Kazaa is a closed-source app that has probably not recieved any comprehensive security analysis, and c) if there were issues, I'd be alerted about them immediately as I'm seeing more 3rd-party auditors more interested in keeping whatever UNIX software secure rather than some silly windows utility.
If the trojans of which you speak are delivered by some cracker, than it's my fault for not keeping up to date on patches. If the trojans are delivered by the author, a highly unlikely event especially with a commonplace app like ftp, that author would essentially be commiting developmental suicide as I and many others wouldn't use software from this author anymore. I do not expect this level of quality in Windows.
Wouldn't you be pissed if it did? But, as you suggest, you only have yourself to blame.
I sure would be, and yup, I'd blame myself. I'm glad that we see eye to eye on this issue, and it's settled.
Besides, Kazaa alerted its users to some extent, and that's the whole point of this damn thread. Your questions of my knowledge of trojanned software is wholly irrelevant as trojans by definition are totally silent about their duality. And no 'Well, the obfuscation of the EULA sections on spyware is analogous to a trojanned program' because I don't see rootkits coming with click-through agreements that the legitimate sysadmin has to click "I Agree." to step through the installation process.
Gee, you can dog me on my misuse of the word altruism but when it comes to trojan, you're the one in the dark
If you disagree, reply.
At that point, one store could of course come up and have you sign no EULA or perhaps one that is comprehensible by Agnes End-Shopper. And this Store will reign Supreme o'er Stores that confuse their Shoppers, demonstrating once again the Power of Capitalism. That is, until the other stores realise the idiocy of their moves and abolish the EULA or work something else out entirely.
Which brings me to my next point: Companies that do stupid things (like Kazaa is doing now) ultimately pay the price for their idiocy (Enron, et. al.) and either change their policies accordingly or nothing happens, proving that their userbase might just not care about what's going on with their own software. Never underestimate the apathy of people, and don't gauge their concern on what a vocal minority says.
And Kazaa is learning, but nowhere in this story do I see the following quote from Kazaa's front page about their "new pledge."
If you disagree, reply.
If you don't understand the EULA of the software, don't install it. Who's forcing you to put this software on your computer?
Besides, shouldn't some warning bell be going off in your head if the legalese in the EULA is overly obfuscated?
Ask yourself: What else could this incoherent block of text mean other than what am I inferring it to be? What are the Company's interests in my installing the Software? What is the ulterior motive? What did I just read? What is the point of each and every single section of text?
If you disagree, reply.
1) I don't need an LCD screen. They're too expensive, I can't get a 17" one that does 1280x1024 without selling a kidney. But I can get a 17" CRT for like $90. And yes, it's beige. I can deal with beige.
/ever/ burn DVD's? They're expensive and overrated.
2) I don't need a DVD burner. Nor do I need a CDRW. Nor do I need a Superdrive that does both. I never burn CD's. I have no need to. I have 100 Mbit switched running throughout the house and all my friends have cable or DSL. I have one computer with a DVD drive. Why would I
2) I buy hardware based on its expandability and what I can do with it, not because of its footprint or form factor or its industrial design or whatever. One of my computers has its parts strewn about on a shelf in the open air. Having to pay extra for non-standard, non-interchangable components is just a bad idea.
3) Does your new imac have even a PCI slot or a 5.25" drive bay? What can I do with this machine? The aforementioned computer has three hard drives and I interchange between a tape drive, a CDR, and DVDR based on what I need to do with it. I have that capability with my computer.
4) I have seen the following monitor connections on a mac: 13W3, HDB15, DB15, HDI45, HDI14, digital flat panel, and now mini-vga. MAKE UP YOUR DAMN MIND ALREADY! I should be able to buy hardware without spending money on $20 dongles. I've seen about ten different card interface connections. Hardware I buy should be, there's that word again, interchaagable. This is just obnxious and stupid.
You guys need to learn that while there are certain technologies that are great and cool and neat, I don't want them shoved down my throat. You need to learn that the strength of the computer lies within its a' la' carte capability. I pick and choose what I want based on what I need to do with it. While my previous assertations are definitely in a very tiny minority, this one is: People buy computers based on what they want to do with them, not what you want them to. Make and license an ATX board with PCI slots, AGP or onboard video
If you do not learn this your market share will suffer accordingly.
Actually, it's a phone that's made in england.
The 'videophone' of CNN/FNC/et al lore is a 7E Communications Talking Head. It's a $8.00/minute Inmarsat hooker-upper.
PCS is NOT a frequency variant of GSM. PCS (Personal Communication Services) is the FCC definition for digital wireless services at the 1900 MHz bandwith range. This includes CDMA, TDMA, and GSM which run in North America at 1900 MHz as opposed to 800 MHz most everywhere else.
The problem here is not Europe being technologically superior the United States, but the fact that their mobile systems run at GSM 900 and 1800 MHz. GSM in the united states is exclusively 1900 MHz.
That being said, Nokia et. al. could easily retool their 800/1800 MHz GSM phones to work at 1900 MHz, but that's just part of the problem. Nokia doesn't sell directly to the consumer, and support is left to the provider, whose customers have a tendency to be more idiotic than their european counterparts.
Providers here have a hard enough time trying to teach Sally Chatterbox and Joe AOL how to use their digital phones, and here you have the other reason why you're not likely to see these kinds of mass-marketed advanced phones here.
Mommy, mommy the slashdotters are after me!
Why? The software I got to replace it, Phone Manager [oxygensoftware.com] could also have fitted onto a floppy disk.
I'm splitting hairs here, but comes on and fits on are two different things. Lots of good software could fit on a 3.5" disk, but if it comes on one in 2002 I'm under the impression that it's just old simply because it comes on a floppy disk. CD-ROM's indicate a level of technology that's post 1996.
we're a long way from the first generation phones - they appeared in the eighties.
And speaking of 1996, I meant first generation digital. By US standards, your first generation digital that you dealt with in the early 1990's is what we played with just a couple years ago. My 5190 came out in ~1996 or thereabouts but I got it new in 2000, and it cost me US$50.
*blade through follicle*
Why? Well, most phones I've ever tried have been poor. Poor build quality ...
... and the PC Suite [nokia.com] for it is hopelessly out of date and utterly useless.
I don't know which phones you've used, but I've found Nokia's industrial design to be absolutely top-notch. I've dropped one of their ubiquitous 5100 series from great heights, and the thing bounces back like a tennis ball ready for more torture. They're built like tanks--I've opened them up and marveled at the strength of the guts inside.
particularly in regard to securing the battery connection.
Tape it if it's broken. How often do you swap batteries? Lithium ion batteries last for hours and I used to carry around a charger in my pack and charge it where I found it convenient.
OK, so the 'lock keypad' function is used to get round one of those moans.
Which would you rather have? A flip-phone? Ever seen the ear part of the flip after it's been caught in a car door and bent 45-degrees backward? Phone engineers have to deal with the rigors of the environments in which their phones will be used. I'd much rather have to key in Menu Button, * than deal with a flimsy piece of plastic that could just easily break off.
I've never used PC Suite, but I assume anything that comes on 3.5" disks fits your description, and nor would it surprise me. My solution: Don't use it. Gnokii is an incredibly done application and served me quite well for the few months I had my 5190.
I'd sacrifice the entire lot for an industrial design that works as a basic phone without falling apart.
I think it's a tad premature to discount next-generation technology phones based on inexperiences with the myopic designs of the first generation series phones. Nokia, et. al. designed the 5190 and the 8850 to be talked on first, SMS'd with second. I would hope Nokia has overcome these interface issues with their more advanced phones as they come out.
It's totally moot to me--I won't see any of these phones for a long, long time as Nokia barely caters to the US market outside of AT&T Wireless's desires--a company I'd rather not deal with again.
The United States is withdrawing from the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty because the language in it prevents the signer nations from developing missile-defense anti-nuke shields. The theory was back in 1973 that if one nation had this technology, they could fire their nukes on another nation and be spared from the concept of mutually assured destruction, (MAD) the idea that if you fire one nuke, you essentially end the world.
... how do they know this simulation is accurate?
The problem with the Test Ban Treaty is that it was written in a different era. Hopefully the events of 11 September indicates to you that there are more than enough people more than willing to kill themselves to inflict as much destruction on the United States as possible.
MAD doesn't work as an effective deterrent when your enemy is willing to die to kill you.
I saw a History Channel tagline that referenced nuclear weapons in the most relevant way: "Weapons so powerful, their mere existence implies 'Peace, or else.'"
This may be straying a bit off-topic here, but what if we hadn't developed the nuke? How many allied and Japanese forces would have died in the invasion of Japan had we not dropped the bomb? 125,000 civillian casualties in Hiroshima and Nagasaki pales in comparison to the amount of possible casualties. The USA estimates 1,000,000 allied casulties in such an invasion, maybe times that by 5 to get the number of Japanese killed.
Remember. Nukes suck. But they're the better than the alternative. However, straying back on topic
P.S. If you disagree, don't moderate, reply.
From this Google result: A sample of lunar dust, weighing only a few milligrams, sold at a Superior Galleries auction in California in 1993 for $42,500
(Final Frontier, May/June 1993, p6). A short while later, a sale of Russian lunar samples took place in New York at a Southeby's auction. An estimated one carat rock fragment sold for a record $442,000 (Final Frontier, March/April, 1994, pp.
58-61)
Couple this with policy gathered from the NASA Office of Inspector General (OIG): "Moon rocks gathered by the Apollo missions are considered national treasures and cannot be privately owned or sold." (OIG's New Reports Dec 1999.)
Sure, MarsHydro is a good idea. But look at NASA's failure to capitalise on the moon-rock market. Not gonna happen with this NASA. Oh well.
yet another argument for the privitasation of NASA. Oh well.
Communications Decency Act.
Passed (but struck down by the US Supreme Court (wooo! score one for Checks and Balances!)) overwhelmingly by the Senate in 1996. It's later version, dubbed The Son of CDA arrived in 1998 and was passed, but that was struck down
Don't think it doesn't happen.