Why the f* can one only see (I am not talking about voting) the nominees when logged in?
Well, you have to be logged in to vote, because otherwise someone would abuse the voting. And if you can't vote, there's really not much point in knowing what the nominees are, are there?
The article says the nominees were chosen "by you readers", but there seems to be a murky grey area between the nominations and what got onto the ballot.
Actually, there are a ballot that you filled out to nominate your choices. The discussions with the stories were just that, discussions. They had no weight in the actual nominations. This was run a little different from the interviews, I may mention.
Sure, I buy it at $2500, and my charity is the United Foundation of Axe Murders. Mike, please make your $2000 check payable to me, as I am the chairman.
Are you a registered non-profit organization? This isn't a "let's throw a few $$$'s around just for the fun of it." You have to get that tax benefit.
Regardless of whether is only takes two seconds, are you telling me you are going to sit and repeatedly load one CD after another into your drive 100 times? Have fun.
Okay, maybe you only have 10 CD's. But it's typically for most people have many, many more. But for the sake of the arguement, let's say we are talking about 100 CD's.
Now, as you are playing CD's, when one finishes, you have to take it out to put another one in. You constantly do this. Perhaps once an hour or so. Anyways, after about 2 weeks, you go through all your CD's. So now what? You start over. Take the last cd out, put the next cd in. take out, put in. take out, put in. take out, put in. take out, put in. take out, put in. This will continue for as long as you choose to listen to music.
However, if as you put the cd in the first time you take 2 seconds to register it with my.mp3.com, then when you finish those 100 cd's your cd swapping days are over. And you just don't have a need to swap cd's anymore, but you can listen to the cd's anywhere. Home, work, friends house. No more need to make sure that you didn't forget the CD's either. I don't know about you, but whether it's 10 CD's or a 100's CD's, it's the same amount of work to continually swap them. And I think that having the available anywhere is a *real* benefit.
Have fun uploading 100 CD's. And creating that playlist. I find I won't be into more than 10 CD's at the same time.
Actually, if you'd read what this was all about, you'd know that there's no uploading. mp3.com already has all the songs encoded on their server. You just need to show them that you own it.
Look at the dearth of inovation we've seen in the browser software area as soon as everyone realized that there was no money to be made there.
Oh, come on. No one prevented Microsoft from making money from the browser. They *chose* to not make money. No, on the other hand, look at all the innovation that has come once Netscape chose to open their browser. I think that proves a lot, don't you?
-Brent
Re:If the cd is in your drive.......
on
MP3.com's Beam-It
·
· Score: 2
why wouldn't you just play it yourself? Saves on download time for people like me who can't get fast internet connection and are stuck on 56k's that work like 28.8's.
2 computers. 2 stereos. A computer at work. CD Player in the car. Yeah, right. I want to haul my CD's everywhere to listen to them. I'll be lucky if their in the right stereo as it is. No, you set up your my.mp3.com account and then you you are set where computers are concerned. Now I just need to remember not to leave the cd in the car when I want to list to the stereo...
Okay, that's enough./. isn't an Open Source advocacy site. They are "news for nerds, stuff that matters". That stuff that matters just happens to include Open Source stuff.
What talk should Rob stop. He's repeated said he wasn't going to release the slash source... and he hasn't. Sounds like the talk matches the walk pretty well.
Remember,/. isn't solely about Open Source and Linux. It's abotu all sorts of things which just happens to include open source and Linux. Maybe Rob doesn't support open source. It doesn't matter. It doesn't have anything to do with the stories on the front page.
Why is this "Flamebait"? Offtopic, yeah, funny, mildly, but certainly not flamebait in any sense of the word. Stupid moderation like this contribute to the stench that slashdot has become.
Don't forget, that the purpose of moderation on slashdot has only 2 results. Either you mark someone up, or you mark them down. The description, although interesting, does not affect anything, and therefore, really isn't important enough to get worked up over. Okay, so maybe the post should have been marked "off-topic" instead of "flaimbait" But the end result is that the post loses one point no matter what, so it doesn't matter at all what the description is. If it needs to be marked down, then any moderation choice that removes a point is good enough, even if it doesn't describe the exact problem with the post.
If you could use the discription to actually do something, like say, in your preferences, have posts marked flaimbait marked down another point and posts marked off-topic marked up a point so that you'd see them, then yes, it would matter. But there's nothing like that implemented now, so why worry about how posts are marked down. Lighten up and enjoy the posted on slashdot instead of getting so anal over how someone marked a post down.
The UDP is the same thing as if legal action was taken against your HOUSE because you had raw sewage spilling out onto the streets. It is now up to the owners of the house to correct the problem, fix the sewage leak, and then have the legal action stopped.
No, it's more like the whole neighborhood was quarentined because your neighbor was pouring raw sewage into the street. You could get out, but couldn't have friends over, mail couldn't be delived, shipments of new PC's couldn't be received.
Actually, a better analogy would be that the UDP is like quarentining off a whole apartment complex because one of the tenants was dumping raw sewage out in the back and comtaminating the cities water, but the apartment manager was refusing to do anything about the situation.
Yes, it's not your fault, and you're suffering to, but the person responsible, isn't responsible, and it's not only affecting you, whether you admit it or not, but a whole other group of people. So the city shuts off your water, and you move out if you have to, unless the apartment manager deals with it.
As it is now I miss out on all the really interesting stuff because I just happen to be away from a dedicated t-1 (that is constantly denied the the average citizen)
What? Dedicated T1 lines are denied to the average citizen? I didn't realize that. On what basis are they denied? Perhaps you can't get a T1 line in residential areas? No, that's not it...
One of the reasons we probably have to thank them, is that without them many of us would probably not be the computer geeks that we are, or have the jobs that we have. Windows is the software that has brought computing to the masses.
That logic requires believing that if it weren't for Microsoft no one else would have brought computers to the masses. I won't believe it. If Microsoft wouldn't have been there, some one else would have. Therefore, we can't attribute mass computing to a sole Microsoft feat, even though they were the ones who did it.
If it wasn't Microsoft it would have been someone else. Please remember that.
As with any OS, the smart shopper sticks to the supported products list.
What a minute! I thought that was the strong point of Windows. It runs on all hardware. It Linux that no need to pay attention to the hardware with, because there are "no drivers".
If I have to pay attention to a "supported products" list, then what's the advantage to paying attention to the Windows list, over the Linux list?
Having read the evil error dialog in question I simply cannot believe we would settle for even a penny in damages. In fact, I'm outraged that we let Caldera bully us into any money whatsoever. I personally think they should pay us for wasting our time.
Obviously, the lawyers didn't agree with you. I find it humorous that a Microsoft employee who has no law training, and probably hasn't studied any of the evidence of the case, apart from what the press reported, thinks that he knows better then the lawyers how the case can be handled. Either two things have happened here. You are blowing hot air around, or Microsoft hired some lousy lawyers. Somethings telling me that the first guess is probably more correct.
If the lawyers felt that settling was the best legal decision, then I'd guess that they know better then me. The lawyers probably spent hundreds of hours studying the case, and the merits of it. Who are you to claim that they are idiots?
Back to the topic at hand, just today I was examining the "evidence"
Yes, let's.
Here's the dialog you're all gloating over without having read:
If you think that that "dialog" was the only thing the case was about, then no wonder you are confused. Is that what the internal memo told you to believe the case was about? IMHO, that was probably the weakest part of the case, which was probably why Microsoft decided to blow it way out of proportion and focus just on that. Much like how they spewed out garbage about "Freedom to Innovate" during the anti-trust trial, when the anti-trust trial had nothing ot do with their freedom to innovate.
For having no idea about what you are talking about, you seem quite sure of yourself.
It alleges that Microsoft is guilty of producing a product that is compatible with one of its other products, and incompatible with a competing product. How is that a crime?
Nope, that's not at all what the case is about. The case was about 2 things.
One, Forcing distributers to put your product above another competitors product, where you are at an advantage. Like if there was a company that sold boards and a company that sold nails. Builders need both, so all is fine. However, the company that makes nails decide to sell boards also. But how will they get builders to buy their boards? Ah, no problem. You go to the company selling the nails and tell them that they won't have nails to sell unless they sell your boards. Problem solved, right? A company that doesn't sell nails, is a company that doesn't sell boards either, no matter who's boards they are.
So, in this case, Microsoft effective kills competition by preventing OEM's from profitably selling DR DOS, instead of their DOS. It isn;t just Microsoft. All large companies that have a product that no one else makes, does the same thing. And they are also sued under anti-trust law, just like Microsoft was.
Second, it is wrong to do something just because it destroys competition. Normally, companies will do this by selling their product at a loss until the competitor is forced out of business. However, this could be just about anything. Say there's a product that's requires a widget of a certain size. You make the widget and I make the widget. However, I make more volume then you do. The company that makes the product has contracts with both of us. However, I soon decide that you are not needed. I can the size of my widget, and tell the company that they either modify their product, or loss the contract. Well, volume of widgets that you produce is not enough to keep them in business, while I can produce enough widgets to meet their need. You quickly go out of business. In Microsoft's case, "adjusting the size of the widget", meant adding some code to prevent Windows from running on DR DOS. The motive was the same. No one expects MS too think of others first. But yet companies aren't allows to do things for the sole purpose of putting competitors out of business, either.
The companies also said, with respect to broadband access, that AOL Time Warner will be committed to ensuring consumer choice of ISPs and content and that they hope this merger will persuade all companies operating broadband platforms to provide consumers with real choice.
That would require them to break anti-trust law. Unlike Microsoft, AOL seems to have some ethics and will probably do what they can to *obey* the law. I doubt you will see the DoJ filing an anti-trust lawsuit against them anytime soon.
...but I still hold firm to the fact that a site that requires cookies to even view it, are abusing cookies and do not deserve my business.
I thought storing session-id's *was* the whole point of cookies? If not to store session ID's, then what *are* cookies for? Storing Credit Card numbers?
Uh ok, Linux must be a BROKEN OS too. Seeing as it resolves microsoft-.com and 3com.com.
You must have a different "Linux" then I do. First of all, the RFC doesn't prevent URL's from starting with a number, just a "-". Second, I tried from my Linux box, and 3com.com worked, as it should. However, microsoft-.com failed, just like it should. On the other hand, from Windows 98, microsoft-.com resolves. Which it shouldn't.
I happen to be a programmer. I know in this case it shouldn't matter that Microsoft doesn't handle invalid URL's because there should never be any. But yet a well written program should *always* check for impossible results. You may be able to say, "well, my program will never get bad data", but it *always* happens, and you should always be prepared to deal with it.
If Microsoft doesn't properly validate input in the browser, then how can we be sure that Microsoft is properly validating input anywhere else? Maybe that is the reason why Windows has the many problems that it does.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, but then it's Microsoft resposibility to deal with it, not Linux Online's.
-BrentWell, you have to be logged in to vote, because otherwise someone would abuse the voting. And if you can't vote, there's really not much point in knowing what the nominees are, are there?
-BrentActually, there are a ballot that you filled out to nominate your choices. The discussions with the stories were just that, discussions. They had no weight in the actual nominations. This was run a little different from the interviews, I may mention.
-BrentWho says that Linux Online has anything to do with it?
Registrant:
Linux Online (LINUX-DOM)
P.O. Box 1068
Laurel, MD 20725-1068
USA
Domain Name: linux.org
Administrative Contact, Technical Contact, Zone Contact:
McLagan, Michael (MM141) mmclagan@INVLOGIC.COM
(301)490-7124 (FAX) (301)490-7162
Billing Contact:
McLagan, Michelle (MS249) michelle@INVLOGIC.COM
(301)490-7124 (FAX) (301)490-7162
Record last updated on 04-Nov-1998.
Record created on 10-May-1994.
Database last updated on 18-Jan-2000 14:03:13 EST.
Domain servers in listed order:
NS.INVLOGIC.COM 205.134.175.254
NS0.AITCOM.NET 208.234.1.34
Registrant:
JS technologies SA (MICROSFOT2-DOM)
Rue du Centre 72
St-Sulpice, 1025
CH
Domain Name: microsfot.com
Administrative Contact:
Szijarto, Jean-Stephane (JS3260) jss@JSTECHNO.CH
+41 21 697 0451
Technical Contact, Zone Contact:
Christophe, Saintebarbe (SCT79) hostmaster@JSTECHNO.CH
+41 21 671 1450 (FAX) +41 21 671 1455
Billing Contact:
Szijarto, Jean-Stephane (JS3260) jss@JSTECHNO.CH
+41 21 697 0451
Record last updated on 22-Nov-1999.
Record created on 11-Jul-1997.
Database last updated on 18-Jan-2000 14:03:13 EST.
Domain servers in listed order:
DNS1.JSTECHNO.CH 195.15.18.200
DNS2.JSTECHNO.CH 195.15.18.252
You can point your IP anywhere you want, can't you?
-Brent
Are you a registered non-profit organization? This isn't a "let's throw a few $$$'s around just for the fun of it." You have to get that tax benefit.
-BrentOkay, maybe you only have 10 CD's. But it's typically for most people have many, many more. But for the sake of the arguement, let's say we are talking about 100 CD's.
Now, as you are playing CD's, when one finishes, you have to take it out to put another one in. You constantly do this. Perhaps once an hour or so. Anyways, after about 2 weeks, you go through all your CD's. So now what? You start over. Take the last cd out, put the next cd in. take out, put in. take out, put in. take out, put in. take out, put in. take out, put in. This will continue for as long as you choose to listen to music.
However, if as you put the cd in the first time you take 2 seconds to register it with my.mp3.com, then when you finish those 100 cd's your cd swapping days are over. And you just don't have a need to swap cd's anymore, but you can listen to the cd's anywhere. Home, work, friends house. No more need to make sure that you didn't forget the CD's either. I don't know about you, but whether it's 10 CD's or a 100's CD's, it's the same amount of work to continually swap them. And I think that having the available anywhere is a *real* benefit.
-BrentActually, if you'd read what this was all about, you'd know that there's no uploading. mp3.com already has all the songs encoded on their server. You just need to show them that you own it.
-BrentOh, come on. No one prevented Microsoft from making money from the browser. They *chose* to not make money. No, on the other hand, look at all the innovation that has come once Netscape chose to open their browser. I think that proves a lot, don't you?
-Brent2 computers. 2 stereos. A computer at work. CD Player in the car. Yeah, right. I want to haul my CD's everywhere to listen to them. I'll be lucky if their in the right stereo as it is. No, you set up your my.mp3.com account and then you you are set where computers are concerned. Now I just need to remember not to leave the cd in the car when I want to list to the stereo...
-BrentOkay, what does that have to do with vendor lock-in? I mean, really, those other OS's have their own chips that they run on.
-BrentOkay, that's enough. /. isn't an Open Source advocacy site. They are "news for nerds, stuff that matters". That stuff that matters just happens to include Open Source stuff.
What talk should Rob stop. He's repeated said he wasn't going to release the slash source ... and he hasn't. Sounds like the talk matches the walk pretty well.
Remember, /. isn't solely about Open Source and Linux. It's abotu all sorts of things which just happens to include open source and Linux. Maybe Rob doesn't support open source. It doesn't matter. It doesn't have anything to do with the stories on the front page.
-BrentDon't forget, that the purpose of moderation on slashdot has only 2 results. Either you mark someone up, or you mark them down. The description, although interesting, does not affect anything, and therefore, really isn't important enough to get worked up over. Okay, so maybe the post should have been marked "off-topic" instead of "flaimbait" But the end result is that the post loses one point no matter what, so it doesn't matter at all what the description is. If it needs to be marked down, then any moderation choice that removes a point is good enough, even if it doesn't describe the exact problem with the post.
If you could use the discription to actually do something, like say, in your preferences, have posts marked flaimbait marked down another point and posts marked off-topic marked up a point so that you'd see them, then yes, it would matter. But there's nothing like that implemented now, so why worry about how posts are marked down. Lighten up and enjoy the posted on slashdot instead of getting so anal over how someone marked a post down.
-BrentI think it'd be handy to get uptimes that are longer then the battery life. After all, why should you have to reboot when you don't need to? :)
-BrentYes, something tells me that too. I don't think that's the market that Transmeta was aiming for and that's great, IMO.
-BrentYes, but so does your's :)
The UDP is the same thing as if legal action was taken against your HOUSE because you had raw sewage spilling out onto the streets. It is now up to the owners of the house to correct the problem, fix the sewage leak, and then have the legal action stopped.No, it's more like the whole neighborhood was quarentined because your neighbor was pouring raw sewage into the street. You could get out, but couldn't have friends over, mail couldn't be delived, shipments of new PC's couldn't be received.
Actually, a better analogy would be that the UDP is like quarentining off a whole apartment complex because one of the tenants was dumping raw sewage out in the back and comtaminating the cities water, but the apartment manager was refusing to do anything about the situation.
Yes, it's not your fault, and you're suffering to, but the person responsible, isn't responsible, and it's not only affecting you, whether you admit it or not, but a whole other group of people. So the city shuts off your water, and you move out if you have to, unless the apartment manager deals with it.
-BrentWhat? Dedicated T1 lines are denied to the average citizen? I didn't realize that. On what basis are they denied? Perhaps you can't get a T1 line in residential areas? No, that's not it...
-BrentBzzt!! See this.
-BrentThat logic requires believing that if it weren't for Microsoft no one else would have brought computers to the masses. I won't believe it. If Microsoft wouldn't have been there, some one else would have. Therefore, we can't attribute mass computing to a sole Microsoft feat, even though they were the ones who did it.
If it wasn't Microsoft it would have been someone else. Please remember that.
-BrentWhat a minute! I thought that was the strong point of Windows. It runs on all hardware. It Linux that no need to pay attention to the hardware with, because there are "no drivers".
If I have to pay attention to a "supported products" list, then what's the advantage to paying attention to the Windows list, over the Linux list?
-BrentObviously, the lawyers didn't agree with you. I find it humorous that a Microsoft employee who has no law training, and probably hasn't studied any of the evidence of the case, apart from what the press reported, thinks that he knows better then the lawyers how the case can be handled. Either two things have happened here. You are blowing hot air around, or Microsoft hired some lousy lawyers. Somethings telling me that the first guess is probably more correct.
If the lawyers felt that settling was the best legal decision, then I'd guess that they know better then me. The lawyers probably spent hundreds of hours studying the case, and the merits of it. Who are you to claim that they are idiots?
Back to the topic at hand, just today I was examining the "evidence"Yes, let's.
Here's the dialog you're all gloating over without having read:If you think that that "dialog" was the only thing the case was about, then no wonder you are confused. Is that what the internal memo told you to believe the case was about? IMHO, that was probably the weakest part of the case, which was probably why Microsoft decided to blow it way out of proportion and focus just on that. Much like how they spewed out garbage about "Freedom to Innovate" during the anti-trust trial, when the anti-trust trial had nothing ot do with their freedom to innovate.
-BrentFor having no idea about what you are talking about, you seem quite sure of yourself.
It alleges that Microsoft is guilty of producing a product that is compatible with one of its other products, and incompatible with a competing product. How is that a crime?Nope, that's not at all what the case is about. The case was about 2 things.
One, Forcing distributers to put your product above another competitors product, where you are at an advantage. Like if there was a company that sold boards and a company that sold nails. Builders need both, so all is fine. However, the company that makes nails decide to sell boards also. But how will they get builders to buy their boards? Ah, no problem. You go to the company selling the nails and tell them that they won't have nails to sell unless they sell your boards. Problem solved, right? A company that doesn't sell nails, is a company that doesn't sell boards either, no matter who's boards they are.
So, in this case, Microsoft effective kills competition by preventing OEM's from profitably selling DR DOS, instead of their DOS. It isn;t just Microsoft. All large companies that have a product that no one else makes, does the same thing. And they are also sued under anti-trust law, just like Microsoft was.
Second, it is wrong to do something just because it destroys competition. Normally, companies will do this by selling their product at a loss until the competitor is forced out of business. However, this could be just about anything. Say there's a product that's requires a widget of a certain size. You make the widget and I make the widget. However, I make more volume then you do. The company that makes the product has contracts with both of us. However, I soon decide that you are not needed. I can the size of my widget, and tell the company that they either modify their product, or loss the contract. Well, volume of widgets that you produce is not enough to keep them in business, while I can produce enough widgets to meet their need. You quickly go out of business. In Microsoft's case, "adjusting the size of the widget", meant adding some code to prevent Windows from running on DR DOS. The motive was the same. No one expects MS too think of others first. But yet companies aren't allows to do things for the sole purpose of putting competitors out of business, either.
-BrentYou forgot to read the press release.
From the AOL press release:
Looks good to me.
-BrentThat would require them to break anti-trust law. Unlike Microsoft, AOL seems to have some ethics and will probably do what they can to *obey* the law. I doubt you will see the DoJ filing an anti-trust lawsuit against them anytime soon.
-BrentI thought storing session-id's *was* the whole point of cookies? If not to store session ID's, then what *are* cookies for? Storing Credit Card numbers?
-BrentYou must have a different "Linux" then I do. First of all, the RFC doesn't prevent URL's from starting with a number, just a "-". Second, I tried from my Linux box, and 3com.com worked, as it should. However, microsoft-.com failed, just like it should. On the other hand, from Windows 98, microsoft-.com resolves. Which it shouldn't.
I happen to be a programmer. I know in this case it shouldn't matter that Microsoft doesn't handle invalid URL's because there should never be any. But yet a well written program should *always* check for impossible results. You may be able to say, "well, my program will never get bad data", but it *always* happens, and you should always be prepared to deal with it.
If Microsoft doesn't properly validate input in the browser, then how can we be sure that Microsoft is properly validating input anywhere else? Maybe that is the reason why Windows has the many problems that it does.
-Brent