Do you feel AC provided enough background information for us to make the conclusion that the Mohawks deserve some scorn? I found his account too sweeping in generalization. And do you feel that the US government (who also deal with indian sovereign territory issues) is sensible? What is the standard for a sensible government? I'm not here to defend drunk Mohawk human traffickers (apparently they run the show on that reservation), just can't get past the implications of what you're saying.
Thank you for that insightful and objective account of life on the Kahnawake reservation. Are you really basing your scorn for a population because they asserted that outside police do not have authority on their land? It's no wonder that it's near impossible to start a business on a reservation when anonymous cowards spread the word that everyone there is untrustworthy. Conflicts between the Mohawks and US/CN law enforcement, on both sides of the border, are nothing new, but they have little to do with the larger problems facing the people that result in crime, not cause it.
I'm sick and tired of people making stereotypical comments about aircraft hangars. These building have legitimate uses, such as storing aircraft, or for repairing an aircraft when it's raining outside. They were never intended for your "rave" parties and communications spectrum testing.
One word: daycare. Google is counting on off-shore data center employees to enroll their children in on-site daycare. The kids get Google's top-notch facilities, flamenco lessons and hot stone massage, and the data center gets adorable little human shields.
isn't this just the new vanity plate, only cheaper and more permanent? A plea for attention (good or bad) and some sort of social validation in the 'digital age'. NOTICE ME, NOTICE ME NOW!!! Fourteen-year-olds don't have vanity plates, they're for adults who crave attention on a fourteen-year-old level.
I can't speak out of experience, but I IMAGINE that having one's foreskin removed as a trophy, be it by David or Ms. Anderson, would warrant a charge of 'emotional distress'. Can we switch to a less graphic metaphor now?
Agree with Fri13 here that getting huffy about SLRs is more a sign of ignorance. It's only a matter of time before a phone catches up with my dSLR's 6mp rating and has better zoom than my 28-200mm lens. I've been asked to stop taking pictures in the yard at Zeitgeist in SF because of my 'professional camera' (I was taking pictures of the bike racks), but there were many people using compact digital cameras and phones. And if the bouncer could have seen how shaky my shots come out, he would have known no camera in the world can make me a professional.
can we call them 'Spyborgs'? http://www.spyborg.com/ is cyber-squatted. Probably another Chinese infiltration of our tech infrastructure. I mean, look at that 'under construction' graphic, if it's not Chinese it must be 1998.
Ladies and gentlemen of the jury. I'm just a caveman. I fell on some ice and later got thawed out by some of your scientists. Your world frightens and confuses me! Sometimes the honking horns of your traffic make me want to get out of my BMW and run off into the hills, or wherever. Sometimes when I get a message on my iphone, I wonder: "Did little demons get inside and type it?" I don't know! My primitive mind can't grasp these concepts. But there is one thing I do know - when a man like Craig Feigin is falsely accused of rigging webcams with spyware, then he is entitled to no less than $10 million in compensatory damages, and $10 million in punitive damages. Thank you.
By not spending money on legal representation, Craig does stand to make money on this, based on free publicity for his site. Doesn't someone trying to sell Oscars tickets through the classified ads send a message about the relevance and popularity of those classifieds?
There's probably a clause in the CL TOU that says 'we don't care what happens to you if you sell something non-transferable.'
According to Ad Age, 2007 U.S. ad spends for the big carriers were as follows, ranking is out of all U.S. advertisers:
(#2)AT&T - $3.2 billion (down 4% from '06)
(#3)Verizon - $3 billion (up 8% from '06)
(#11)Sprint Nextel - $1.9 billion (up 7.2% from '06)
It's just a big gouging merry-go-round in an attempt to woo customers into multi-year contracts, with a little SMS gravy on top. When I was in college, we'd switch our landline carrier every month or so to game the rates. Then 'free long distance' appeared, attached to a contract. Remember when Americans were capable of regulating their phone usage to manage a monthly bill? I'd bet dollars to doughnuts that the current contract model is way more profitable, even with the ungodly amount of advertising needed to get customers to switch. A common gripe I have is the lack of customer retention effort - the only good deals are for new customers, as if there's collusion to keep subscribers moving from carrier to carrier. But I honestly can't remember it being better before cell phones...hell, we rented rotary phones from Ma Bell. Monopoly or Oligopoly....don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.
I think your TV analogy is off. The networks are not the products in this case. In TV, the product is advertising time. The networks pay for programming by selling advertising. Once the show has run though, there is the secondary (and lucrative) market of syndication, which is the precursor to this 'long tail' stuff.
In our new media age, old and new programming is recommoditized as DVDs and downloads (these days a few hours after the programs original airing), and so you can posit that a couple people out there will be willing to pay for the season one dvd of The Facts of Life - the challenge is finding a retailer to stock it. The vendor that can minimize stock and ably fulfill this product at the lowest cost stands to make money if there are enough Facts of Life et al products being ordered to justify the merchandising, stocking and shipping involved.
I would also argue that networks like Disovery channel, though newer, are CONSTANTLY producing this relatively short-lived-appeal material. Let's say it's a 2-hour Shark Week special from 1994. That's the tail right there, yo. It's deep catalog that would bankrupt Hollywood Video to stock across their chain, but having 3 copies at Amazon (multiplied across the breadth of obscure merchanise offerings) provides a rewarding customer experience, i.e. they'll come back for more, and, as long as people are ordering it, profit.
The sad truth is that concept models, like science fiction, can only conceive of the future as based on funadamental limitations of the present. Why would someone in the future put a computer in their lap when they can wear it like a bluetooth 'digital mullet' earpiece or as a stylish cap that interfaces with the brain through the skin?
Slashdot Mirror
Then it must be time for Plan B® From Outer Space
Do you feel AC provided enough background information for us to make the conclusion that the Mohawks deserve some scorn? I found his account too sweeping in generalization. And do you feel that the US government (who also deal with indian sovereign territory issues) is sensible? What is the standard for a sensible government? I'm not here to defend drunk Mohawk human traffickers (apparently they run the show on that reservation), just can't get past the implications of what you're saying.
Thank you for that insightful and objective account of life on the Kahnawake reservation. Are you really basing your scorn for a population because they asserted that outside police do not have authority on their land? It's no wonder that it's near impossible to start a business on a reservation when anonymous cowards spread the word that everyone there is untrustworthy. Conflicts between the Mohawks and US/CN law enforcement, on both sides of the border, are nothing new, but they have little to do with the larger problems facing the people that result in crime, not cause it.
I'm sick and tired of people making stereotypical comments about aircraft hangars. These building have legitimate uses, such as storing aircraft, or for repairing an aircraft when it's raining outside. They were never intended for your "rave" parties and communications spectrum testing.
One word: daycare. Google is counting on off-shore data center employees to enroll their children in on-site daycare. The kids get Google's top-notch facilities, flamenco lessons and hot stone massage, and the data center gets adorable little human shields.
isn't this just the new vanity plate, only cheaper and more permanent? A plea for attention (good or bad) and some sort of social validation in the 'digital age'. NOTICE ME, NOTICE ME NOW!!! Fourteen-year-olds don't have vanity plates, they're for adults who crave attention on a fourteen-year-old level.
Yeah, but my mp3s fall through the holes if I don't put down a layer of cardboard on the bottom of the crate.
I can't speak out of experience, but I IMAGINE that having one's foreskin removed as a trophy, be it by David or Ms. Anderson, would warrant a charge of 'emotional distress'. Can we switch to a less graphic metaphor now?
Agree with Fri13 here that getting huffy about SLRs is more a sign of ignorance. It's only a matter of time before a phone catches up with my dSLR's 6mp rating and has better zoom than my 28-200mm lens. I've been asked to stop taking pictures in the yard at Zeitgeist in SF because of my 'professional camera' (I was taking pictures of the bike racks), but there were many people using compact digital cameras and phones. And if the bouncer could have seen how shaky my shots come out, he would have known no camera in the world can make me a professional.
As long as I can 'Arrange by Penis' I should be able to find everything I need.
you said "big muff"
can we call them 'Spyborgs'? http://www.spyborg.com/ is cyber-squatted. Probably another Chinese infiltration of our tech infrastructure. I mean, look at that 'under construction' graphic, if it's not Chinese it must be 1998.
Ladies and gentlemen of the jury. I'm just a caveman. I fell on some ice and later got thawed out by some of your scientists. Your world frightens and confuses me! Sometimes the honking horns of your traffic make me want to get out of my BMW and run off into the hills, or wherever. Sometimes when I get a message on my iphone, I wonder: "Did little demons get inside and type it?" I don't know! My primitive mind can't grasp these concepts. But there is one thing I do know - when a man like Craig Feigin is falsely accused of rigging webcams with spyware, then he is entitled to no less than $10 million in compensatory damages, and $10 million in punitive damages. Thank you.
There's probably a clause in the CL TOU that says 'we don't care what happens to you if you sell something non-transferable.'
According to Ad Age, 2007 U.S. ad spends for the big carriers were as follows, ranking is out of all U.S. advertisers:
(#2)AT&T - $3.2 billion (down 4% from '06)
(#3)Verizon - $3 billion (up 8% from '06)
(#11)Sprint Nextel - $1.9 billion (up 7.2% from '06)
It's just a big gouging merry-go-round in an attempt to woo customers into multi-year contracts, with a little SMS gravy on top. When I was in college, we'd switch our landline carrier every month or so to game the rates. Then 'free long distance' appeared, attached to a contract. Remember when Americans were capable of regulating their phone usage to manage a monthly bill? I'd bet dollars to doughnuts that the current contract model is way more profitable, even with the ungodly amount of advertising needed to get customers to switch. A common gripe I have is the lack of customer retention effort - the only good deals are for new customers, as if there's collusion to keep subscribers moving from carrier to carrier. But I honestly can't remember it being better before cell phones...hell, we rented rotary phones from Ma Bell. Monopoly or Oligopoly....don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.
I think your TV analogy is off. The networks are not the products in this case. In TV, the product is advertising time. The networks pay for programming by selling advertising. Once the show has run though, there is the secondary (and lucrative) market of syndication, which is the precursor to this 'long tail' stuff. In our new media age, old and new programming is recommoditized as DVDs and downloads (these days a few hours after the programs original airing), and so you can posit that a couple people out there will be willing to pay for the season one dvd of The Facts of Life - the challenge is finding a retailer to stock it. The vendor that can minimize stock and ably fulfill this product at the lowest cost stands to make money if there are enough Facts of Life et al products being ordered to justify the merchandising, stocking and shipping involved. I would also argue that networks like Disovery channel, though newer, are CONSTANTLY producing this relatively short-lived-appeal material. Let's say it's a 2-hour Shark Week special from 1994. That's the tail right there, yo. It's deep catalog that would bankrupt Hollywood Video to stock across their chain, but having 3 copies at Amazon (multiplied across the breadth of obscure merchanise offerings) provides a rewarding customer experience, i.e. they'll come back for more, and, as long as people are ordering it, profit.
The sad truth is that concept models, like science fiction, can only conceive of the future as based on funadamental limitations of the present. Why would someone in the future put a computer in their lap when they can wear it like a bluetooth 'digital mullet' earpiece or as a stylish cap that interfaces with the brain through the skin?
Won't *someone* think of the cable box?!!