More to the point, HOW did this film make it into the public domain. I thought copyrights were automatically lengthened. I thought that one of our hopes was for legislation to require intervention to keep copyrights active, so things would begin falling intot he public domain, again.
Of course in Eldred vs Ashcroft, it was asserted (and not rebuked by the court) that Congress even has the ability to remove art from the public domain, and place it back under copyright. Combine this idea with the recent eminent domain decision, and hooooo boy!
But when the Hulk escaped from the secret underground base, he went jumping across the landscape, and ended up in Arches National Park, a few miles from my sister's house in Moab, Utah. When General Ross said, "Make it into a parking lot," he was talking about Fin Canyon, one of the places out there my daughter and I went hiking a few years back.
But I guess I'm not commenting about the movie, am I. I guess I wasn't terribly disappointed, but I'd heard so much ahead of time, that my expectations were lowered.
Imagine that Joe 6pak has never viewed HD content on his PC. Then along come the MPAA and Microsoft announcing, "Now you can watch HD on your PC with Longhorn!" Upon reading the fine print, finds that he needs a "better" monitor, but he can watch for now at "slightly reduced quality." After this, he begins budgeting his monitor "upgrade."
So the makers of monitors and panels will be made happy by this additional upgrade churn.
Notice that Joe doesn't know he's been disabled, he thinks he's been enabled. Perhaps that's why the MPAA is playing so tightly with the broadcast flag. Most people may never know that the broadcast flag takes away rights, they'll just know that after the broadcast flag, they'll gain the ability to watch HDTV on computers. I wonder if there will be some sort of "technical reason campaign" to explain why free and open recording just can't work under HDTV, unless you have a broadcast flag.
Don't you really mean, "not like Windows." As others have said, it's just a convention, and once you adapted to it, it really worked well, and was less ambiguous than Windows.
Or, for a favorite quote: "The only truly intuitive user interface is the nipple. All else is learned." I still remember my daughter "learning" to eat cereal from a spoon. Her tongue still worked in nipple-mode, pushing food out of her mouth as she tried to eat it. Her stop-gap invention was to use her foot. We put the food in her mouth, she stuck her toes in her mouth, and sucked. The food got in, and her hunger taken care of. Eventually, she learned to do it without the toes.
Is it any less a generalization than "both parents working, kids in daycare?"
What was the pre-50's general case, then? Was the sweatshop model any more than a snapshot in time, like the 50's? Even in the sweatshop model, who took care of the kids too small to be in the sweatshop? For the agricultural model, I have half (Both of my parents were raised on farms, and I've worked on more than one farm, myself.) a clue... the kids worked the land, alongside their parents. I suspect the hunter-gatherer model was similar to the agricultural model, but that's only supposition.
In any of these models, I suspect the caregiver for small children was usually/frequently family, tribe member, or close friend. (basically, a modern tribe member) In any of these cases, someone with a vested interest in the children's future.
Cut away "Leave it to Beaver," and the essence of my argument is whether or not the caregiver has a vested interest in the child's future. Or is the caregiver the low-cost provider looking for minimum fuss. I know there are responsible day-cares out there that do a good job of balancing strictness and nurturing. But I suspect it's also awfully prone to the race-to-the-bottom cost-driven model.
Not that I approve of "substitute legislation for the necessity of parenting," but if we've substituted day-care and latchkeys for parents, a lot of the damage to parenting has already been done.
Back in the 50's we had the classic "Leave it to Beaver" parenting model, where Dad went to work, and Mom stayed home with the kids. Perhaps Mom was swilling the liquor and playing poker with her friends, but mine wasn't, and AFAIK, the other moms in the neighborhood weren't. We had active and involved moms who enforced values, (to put it in current-speak) kissed skinned knees, and got us back up on our bikes, etc.
Fast-forward to today, where the norm is either two incomes, or a single working income. Young kids are in day-care - presumably the low-cost provider, and older kids lock the doors after getting home from school. If parents get home at 5:00 and put the kids to bed at 9:00, that's 4 hours, 5 if you include an hour in the morning. You can "teach" all you want during that 4-5 hours, but that's dwarfed by the "imprint time" with the sitter for small kids and classmates/media for larger kids. But then again, two wrongs don't make a right. Further legislation doesn't correct the problem of busy parents, it only tries to hide it.
Not that I think 2 working parents is always bad. Some families can handle it. I just don't think it's good as the "standard model" for our society. But from the Government's point of view, it's great! Put Mom to work and you also partially finance a day-care worker, collecting taxes from both. You also find less cooking-from-scratch and more prepared foods, with attendant higher corporate profits (taxes, again) and job creation rates.
Intel would be perfectly well within their rights to have a compiler with code-switching amoung the various Pentia versions. They're also within their rights to detect a non-Intel CPU and fail, on that bases. Furthermore, they're within their rights to take non-Intel CPUs and put them on the least-optimized Intel code-path.
What they did was to put an entirely separate code-path in for non-Intel CPUs. The real question is: "Is the non-Intel code path really the most robust possible code, most likely to work on ANY x86 clone?" If so, then their real crime is of not warning the user that they're getting slow, unoptimized code.
Over the weekend I heard that the Cleveland Plain Dealer had dropped 2 investigations, because they feared getting the Miller treatment. (http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/arti cle_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000976374 ) Don't forget, her publisher has been taking on some rather large fines, too. When investigative reporting is stopped before it even really starts, because of fear of legal retribution...
Of course, not that I would mind seeing Karl Rove NAILED, but... (It would be interesting to see John McCain on the committee investigating Karl Rove, if it comes to that. But I doubt it will.)
IMHO, China is "Socialist" primarily in name and origin or the current regime.
It's really about power, the people who have it, and their desire to keep it. Socialism, Capitalism, Boontism, who cares, as long as the power stays where it is.
I agree with a later poster, that having a freewheeling, energetic, innovative economy, PLUS rigid control from the top with perpetuation of power is an inconsistent model.
But thankfully they're getting away from turning servers on by default. You should have gotten updated before activating the ftp server, and the distribution should have been set up that way, or had instructions to that effect, or whatever.
Not to pick on RedHat, since this applies to anyone. It's not in RedHat's best interest to earn any sort of "most cracked" award. In that light, it NEVER makes any sense to ship with services turned on. The first post-install online act should be a security update, and then a separate script to enable services. (Just IMHO, of course.)
In the past, I've had a two-part firewall script. The first part is able to run before the NIC comes online, and lets nothing in except DHCP negotiation. The second part runs after we have an IP, and is able to be more intelligent about allowing connections.
I was stunned last week to actually find myself on the same side of a ruling as Clarence Thomas. He was on the losing side of Eminent Domain, along with me.
On another site, (fark?) I saw this listed as left-wing liberals at work. I beg to differ. Left-wing liberals have long had their form of eminent domain - taking land for the common good. This was right-wing eminent domain, taking land and giving it to developers - for the economic common good. (We'll just have to see how that one plays out.)
I say that the Democrats should take a stand, and if the Nuclear Option happens, it happens. Perhaps it will finally sound some sort of warning that things are getting badly skewed around Washington, and maybe the right-swinging pendulum will finally hit (slam against?) the stop.
As it appears to me, the "compromise" of a month or so back simply got a Bush appointee more easily confirmed, keeps the Nuclear Option available, and makes the Democrats look wishy-washy. I haven't personally checked... were ANY of the controversial nominations withdrawn? Did ANYTHING happen other than, "We won't go Nuclear, yet!" and another got confirmed? It didn't look like a compromise to me, just a measured appeasement.
Heck, we don't even HAVE a video console in the house, of any flavor.
Personally, I'm in the "go outside and play" camp of my last sentence. Someone else responded about that being a "Mom" thing, but Dads can have that attitude, too. I'm just waiting (and fearing) for the "virtual sandlot" football, baseball, and kick-the-can computer/console games.
Let's pretend we have a game console, and it's planned competitive lifetime is 4 years. It introduces at $400, and a year later it's available for $300. But really, $400 for a 4 year lifetime means you're "writing down" $100/year. In that case, the early-adopter and the wait-for-the-price-to-drop users have gotten equal value out of the consoles. In fact, the early-adopter may have gotten better value, because his first game is being written down over 4 years instead of 3, so it costs less per year.
I know it's overly simplified, but there is one point that lasts... The early adopter does fork out the big bux, but he also gets that early usage out of the console, and perhaps more usage than the price waiter. The latter argument has holes too, in that the early adopter probably adopts the next generation early as well, so both get about the same amount of usage. Still, you buy it to use it, and if you buy early, you get to use early. The idea model, from a cost basis, would be to be an early adopter for every other generation, either skipping the in-between generations or getting them really cheap on eBay.
But if you're strictly on a cost basis, skip the game consoles entirely, and take up real-world activities that also improve your fitness.
I suspect Nintendo knows their market, and it's not the top-feeders. I don't have 1080i, not even 720p, and neither do most of the people I know. Given the penetration rate of HDTV, I'd say that at the lower end it's feasible to ignore 1080i for this generation, if a little risky. For the current generation, Nintendo has occupied a lower space than XBox and PS2, and it looks like they're playing there, again. The XBox2 and PS3 are sounding so expensive that they may actually expand Nintendo's niche, assuming it's well-tuned to its market.
I agree that the XBox2 and PS3 will need 1080i, and everyone in the following generation will.
Look up the phrase "cut off their air supply" on google. Microsoft can package or bundle their antivirus with some other component or combination of components, so that there's no money to be made in the standalone virus-scanning market. As others have said, this is most likely a server-related move.
1984 didn't happen, at least not in 1984, because Orwell's book was so frightening. Too bad the fear lasted less than 21 years. Should be required reading in high school. (I thought it frequently was.)
Y2K didn't happen because everyone feared it, and did a heck of a lot of work to prevent it, possibly fueling the dot-com boom. (and bust, when Y2K dollars were finished being spent.)
Maybe the Broadcast Flag didn't happen (this time) because the EFF was on guard, and alerted the most obnoxious people they could find, for the response.
The other responses are basically flip or counter-culture. I'll give you a good one.
Take a little history lesson of the past 2 decades. Search with "DRDOS" and "AARD". Or try "DOS ain't done". Or "cut off their air supply". Their corporate conduct is something out of the Robber Baron era.
I haven't taken any potshots at their products. I'm talking about their conduct.
A while (decade+) back, I was reading a report. At the time, the most successful product ever was the IBM 3350 disk drive. The second most successful product was the IBM 3340, which the 3350 replaced. The third was the Ford Mustang.
In the same timeframe, the revenue of the IBM 3090 processor series constituted 0.1% of the US GDP. Yeah, 0.1% is a small number, but that big a fraction of the GDP is incredible. (Maybe I'm off by an order of magnitude, but the same would be true of 0.01%, against the US GDP.)
Basically, "This too, shall pass."
I look at what happens in any market where Microsoft has achieved monopoly - stagnation. For instance, DOS was stagnant until DRDOS gave it a kick. IE stagnated after Netscape died, until Firefox hit the radar. It's in all of our best interest for Microsoft to not "win", but for them to continue to compete.
Step 1: snatch up a myriad of the brightest minds around Step 2: ??? Step 3: Profit!!!
Step1 isn't even the most important step here. * First off, there are those who assert that just about everyone is capable of working at "nearly brilliant" levels (I added the "nearly.") of creativity, given the right environment, it's just that most people have been trained by society not to be creative. I'm hesitant to buy in too fully, but I will say that merely good contributors could work wonders in the proper environment. Second, given the wrong environment, the brightest mindes are likely to be even more discontent than average contributors. Finally, probably the most important factor is that the founders are still at the helm. Usually the founders know what they want, have a vision of how to get there, and have the karma to make the organization march to their plan. That's hard to match once new people take over, and a business quits being a personal vision, and becomes just a business.
I fear I'm being defeatist, and planning for the worst. When I get home, I will use the EFF petition page, for all the good I expect it to do.
So it's time to order either Air2PC or PCHD-3000. Technically, I suspect the Air2PC looks like the better card, but it's out of stock until August. It looks like I might be able to get a PCHD-3000 immediately. The old date was at the end of this month, and I'm really not ready to do anything with this yet, but I do want a "grandfathered" ASTC card.
Does anyone know when this legislation would have the Broadcast Flag taking effect?
The problem is that there isn't much in the way of a viable alternative to Leahy, at the moment. At least he brings an echo of deliberation to the Senate, instead of simply rubber-stamping all of W's wishes.
Slashdot Mirror
More to the point, HOW did this film make it into the public domain. I thought copyrights were automatically lengthened. I thought that one of our hopes was for legislation to require intervention to keep copyrights active, so things would begin falling intot he public domain, again.
Of course in Eldred vs Ashcroft, it was asserted (and not rebuked by the court) that Congress even has the ability to remove art from the public domain, and place it back under copyright. Combine this idea with the recent eminent domain decision, and hooooo boy!
But when the Hulk escaped from the secret underground base, he went jumping across the landscape, and ended up in Arches National Park, a few miles from my sister's house in Moab, Utah. When General Ross said, "Make it into a parking lot," he was talking about Fin Canyon, one of the places out there my daughter and I went hiking a few years back.
But I guess I'm not commenting about the movie, am I. I guess I wasn't terribly disappointed, but I'd heard so much ahead of time, that my expectations were lowered.
Oh, but it is brilliant marketing...
Imagine that Joe 6pak has never viewed HD content on his PC. Then along come the MPAA and Microsoft announcing, "Now you can watch HD on your PC with Longhorn!" Upon reading the fine print, finds that he needs a "better" monitor, but he can watch for now at "slightly reduced quality." After this, he begins budgeting his monitor "upgrade."
So the makers of monitors and panels will be made happy by this additional upgrade churn.
Notice that Joe doesn't know he's been disabled, he thinks he's been enabled. Perhaps that's why the MPAA is playing so tightly with the broadcast flag. Most people may never know that the broadcast flag takes away rights, they'll just know that after the broadcast flag, they'll gain the ability to watch HDTV on computers. I wonder if there will be some sort of "technical reason campaign" to explain why free and open recording just can't work under HDTV, unless you have a broadcast flag.
Whoaaaaa.... You've found a situation where GNAA almost looks relevant to a thread. (any thread)
Counter-intuitive?
Don't you really mean, "not like Windows." As others have said, it's just a convention, and once you adapted to it, it really worked well, and was less ambiguous than Windows.
Or, for a favorite quote: "The only truly intuitive user interface is the nipple. All else is learned." I still remember my daughter "learning" to eat cereal from a spoon. Her tongue still worked in nipple-mode, pushing food out of her mouth as she tried to eat it. Her stop-gap invention was to use her foot. We put the food in her mouth, she stuck her toes in her mouth, and sucked. The food got in, and her hunger taken care of. Eventually, she learned to do it without the toes.
Gee, so many posts in one subthread that mixes poetry, Bill Gates, and MSCE, and NOT EVEN ONE VOGAN REFERENCE!
Is it any less a generalization than "both parents working, kids in daycare?"
What was the pre-50's general case, then?
Was the sweatshop model any more than a snapshot in time, like the 50's?
Even in the sweatshop model, who took care of the kids too small to be in the sweatshop?
For the agricultural model, I have half (Both of my parents were raised on farms, and I've worked on more than one farm, myself.) a clue... the kids worked the land, alongside their parents.
I suspect the hunter-gatherer model was similar to the agricultural model, but that's only supposition.
In any of these models, I suspect the caregiver for small children was usually/frequently family, tribe member, or close friend. (basically, a modern tribe member) In any of these cases, someone with a vested interest in the children's future.
Cut away "Leave it to Beaver," and the essence of my argument is whether or not the caregiver has a vested interest in the child's future. Or is the caregiver the low-cost provider looking for minimum fuss. I know there are responsible day-cares out there that do a good job of balancing strictness and nurturing. But I suspect it's also awfully prone to the race-to-the-bottom cost-driven model.
Not that I approve of "substitute legislation for the necessity of parenting," but if we've substituted day-care and latchkeys for parents, a lot of the damage to parenting has already been done.
Back in the 50's we had the classic "Leave it to Beaver" parenting model, where Dad went to work, and Mom stayed home with the kids. Perhaps Mom was swilling the liquor and playing poker with her friends, but mine wasn't, and AFAIK, the other moms in the neighborhood weren't. We had active and involved moms who enforced values, (to put it in current-speak) kissed skinned knees, and got us back up on our bikes, etc.
Fast-forward to today, where the norm is either two incomes, or a single working income. Young kids are in day-care - presumably the low-cost provider, and older kids lock the doors after getting home from school. If parents get home at 5:00 and put the kids to bed at 9:00, that's 4 hours, 5 if you include an hour in the morning. You can "teach" all you want during that 4-5 hours, but that's dwarfed by the "imprint time" with the sitter for small kids and classmates/media for larger kids. But then again, two wrongs don't make a right. Further legislation doesn't correct the problem of busy parents, it only tries to hide it.
Not that I think 2 working parents is always bad. Some families can handle it. I just don't think it's good as the "standard model" for our society. But from the Government's point of view, it's great! Put Mom to work and you also partially finance a day-care worker, collecting taxes from both. You also find less cooking-from-scratch and more prepared foods, with attendant higher corporate profits (taxes, again) and job creation rates.
Intel would be perfectly well within their rights to have a compiler with code-switching amoung the various Pentia versions. They're also within their rights to detect a non-Intel CPU and fail, on that bases. Furthermore, they're within their rights to take non-Intel CPUs and put them on the least-optimized Intel code-path.
What they did was to put an entirely separate code-path in for non-Intel CPUs. The real question is: "Is the non-Intel code path really the most robust possible code, most likely to work on ANY x86 clone?" If so, then their real crime is of not warning the user that they're getting slow, unoptimized code.
Over the weekend I heard that the Cleveland Plain Dealer had dropped 2 investigations, because they feared getting the Miller treatment. (http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/arti cle_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000976374 ) Don't forget, her publisher has been taking on some rather large fines, too. When investigative reporting is stopped before it even really starts, because of fear of legal retribution...
Of course, not that I would mind seeing Karl Rove NAILED, but... (It would be interesting to see John McCain on the committee investigating Karl Rove, if it comes to that. But I doubt it will.)
IMHO, China is "Socialist" primarily in name and origin or the current regime.
It's really about power, the people who have it, and their desire to keep it. Socialism, Capitalism, Boontism, who cares, as long as the power stays where it is.
I agree with a later poster, that having a freewheeling, energetic, innovative economy, PLUS rigid control from the top with perpetuation of power is an inconsistent model.
But thankfully they're getting away from turning servers on by default. You should have gotten updated before activating the ftp server, and the distribution should have been set up that way, or had instructions to that effect, or whatever.
Not to pick on RedHat, since this applies to anyone. It's not in RedHat's best interest to earn any sort of "most cracked" award. In that light, it NEVER makes any sense to ship with services turned on. The first post-install online act should be a security update, and then a separate script to enable services. (Just IMHO, of course.)
In the past, I've had a two-part firewall script. The first part is able to run before the NIC comes online, and lets nothing in except DHCP negotiation. The second part runs after we have an IP, and is able to be more intelligent about allowing connections.
That's one way of putting it, and I won't even dispute it. But then again, I go there (and memepool) primarily for humor.
Much of the time, he seems like a classic neocon, and I'm surprised when he comes out with a counter-example.
I was stunned last week to actually find myself on the same side of a ruling as Clarence Thomas. He was on the losing side of Eminent Domain, along with me.
On another site, (fark?) I saw this listed as left-wing liberals at work. I beg to differ. Left-wing liberals have long had their form of eminent domain - taking land for the common good. This was right-wing eminent domain, taking land and giving it to developers - for the economic common good. (We'll just have to see how that one plays out.)
I say that the Democrats should take a stand, and if the Nuclear Option happens, it happens. Perhaps it will finally sound some sort of warning that things are getting badly skewed around Washington, and maybe the right-swinging pendulum will finally hit (slam against?) the stop.
As it appears to me, the "compromise" of a month or so back simply got a Bush appointee more easily confirmed, keeps the Nuclear Option available, and makes the Democrats look wishy-washy. I haven't personally checked... were ANY of the controversial nominations withdrawn? Did ANYTHING happen other than, "We won't go Nuclear, yet!" and another got confirmed? It didn't look like a compromise to me, just a measured appeasement.
Heck, we don't even HAVE a video console in the house, of any flavor.
Personally, I'm in the "go outside and play" camp of my last sentence. Someone else responded about that being a "Mom" thing, but Dads can have that attitude, too. I'm just waiting (and fearing) for the "virtual sandlot" football, baseball, and kick-the-can computer/console games.
OK, let's play a simplified math game.
Let's pretend we have a game console, and it's planned competitive lifetime is 4 years. It introduces at $400, and a year later it's available for $300. But really, $400 for a 4 year lifetime means you're "writing down" $100/year. In that case, the early-adopter and the wait-for-the-price-to-drop users have gotten equal value out of the consoles. In fact, the early-adopter may have gotten better value, because his first game is being written down over 4 years instead of 3, so it costs less per year.
I know it's overly simplified, but there is one point that lasts... The early adopter does fork out the big bux, but he also gets that early usage out of the console, and perhaps more usage than the price waiter. The latter argument has holes too, in that the early adopter probably adopts the next generation early as well, so both get about the same amount of usage. Still, you buy it to use it, and if you buy early, you get to use early. The idea model, from a cost basis, would be to be an early adopter for every other generation, either skipping the in-between generations or getting them really cheap on eBay.
But if you're strictly on a cost basis, skip the game consoles entirely, and take up real-world activities that also improve your fitness.
I suspect Nintendo knows their market, and it's not the top-feeders. I don't have 1080i, not even 720p, and neither do most of the people I know. Given the penetration rate of HDTV, I'd say that at the lower end it's feasible to ignore 1080i for this generation, if a little risky. For the current generation, Nintendo has occupied a lower space than XBox and PS2, and it looks like they're playing there, again. The XBox2 and PS3 are sounding so expensive that they may actually expand Nintendo's niche, assuming it's well-tuned to its market.
I agree that the XBox2 and PS3 will need 1080i, and everyone in the following generation will.
Look up the phrase "cut off their air supply" on google. Microsoft can package or bundle their antivirus with some other component or combination of components, so that there's no money to be made in the standalone virus-scanning market. As others have said, this is most likely a server-related move.
1984 didn't happen, at least not in 1984, because Orwell's book was so frightening. Too bad the fear lasted less than 21 years. Should be required reading in high school. (I thought it frequently was.)
Y2K didn't happen because everyone feared it, and did a heck of a lot of work to prevent it, possibly fueling the dot-com boom. (and bust, when Y2K dollars were finished being spent.)
Maybe the Broadcast Flag didn't happen (this time) because the EFF was on guard, and alerted the most obnoxious people they could find, for the response.
The other responses are basically flip or counter-culture. I'll give you a good one.
Take a little history lesson of the past 2 decades. Search with "DRDOS" and "AARD". Or try "DOS ain't done". Or "cut off their air supply". Their corporate conduct is something out of the Robber Baron era.
I haven't taken any potshots at their products. I'm talking about their conduct.
A while (decade+) back, I was reading a report. At the time, the most successful product ever was the IBM 3350 disk drive. The second most successful product was the IBM 3340, which the 3350 replaced. The third was the Ford Mustang.
In the same timeframe, the revenue of the IBM 3090 processor series constituted 0.1% of the US GDP. Yeah, 0.1% is a small number, but that big a fraction of the GDP is incredible. (Maybe I'm off by an order of magnitude, but the same would be true of 0.01%, against the US GDP.)
Basically, "This too, shall pass."
I look at what happens in any market where Microsoft has achieved monopoly - stagnation. For instance, DOS was stagnant until DRDOS gave it a kick. IE stagnated after Netscape died, until Firefox hit the radar. It's in all of our best interest for Microsoft to not "win", but for them to continue to compete.
To re-frame this into the overused /. mold...
Step 1: snatch up a myriad of the brightest minds around
Step 2: ???
Step 3: Profit!!!
Step1 isn't even the most important step here. * First off, there are those who assert that just about everyone is capable of working at "nearly brilliant" levels (I added the "nearly.") of creativity, given the right environment, it's just that most people have been trained by society not to be creative. I'm hesitant to buy in too fully, but I will say that merely good contributors could work wonders in the proper environment.
Second, given the wrong environment, the brightest mindes are likely to be even more discontent than average contributors.
Finally, probably the most important factor is that the founders are still at the helm. Usually the founders know what they want, have a vision of how to get there, and have the karma to make the organization march to their plan. That's hard to match once new people take over, and a business quits being a personal vision, and becomes just a business.
I fear I'm being defeatist, and planning for the worst. When I get home, I will use the EFF petition page, for all the good I expect it to do.
So it's time to order either Air2PC or PCHD-3000. Technically, I suspect the Air2PC looks like the better card, but it's out of stock until August. It looks like I might be able to get a PCHD-3000 immediately. The old date was at the end of this month, and I'm really not ready to do anything with this yet, but I do want a "grandfathered" ASTC card.
Does anyone know when this legislation would have the Broadcast Flag taking effect?
The problem is that there isn't much in the way of a viable alternative to Leahy, at the moment. At least he brings an echo of deliberation to the Senate, instead of simply rubber-stamping all of W's wishes.