I know plenty of people who "Delete" their accounts only to start them up again later. They just don't like being on Facebook/searchable, except on their own time.
I'm sure that there are plenty of people who deactivate Facebook for stupid reasons... a friend sent them a mean message, a cute guy didn't friend them back, etc, and a week later, they want their account back. Facebook lets them get it all back without forcing them to re-upload hundreds of pictures and pages worth of information.
I really hope this isn't real, because the article reeks of corruption.
Seriously, being _forced_ to spend $2/trashbag just to throw shit away in? It's obvious that the city is just trying to get money... for $2 you can get like 100 GLAD trashbags.
Don't take this as flamebait... I am looking for honest answers:
How is jailbreaking an iPhone different from removing DRM from a game?
Am I wrong that Jailbreaking an iPhone simply allows you to use more applications on it? Is this not "Fair Use?" Is it true that there are free, non-stolen programs that wouldn't normally run on an iPhone without it being Jailbroken? Or is Jailbreaking simply a means to running pirated iPhone apps?
Just because something isn't ruled explicitly legal doesn't make it illegal, but would definitely help if some day someone wanted to sue over a jailbreak.
That is a subtle, but powerful distinction. Mod insightful.
I've grown up with Windows, and I've used the Registry Editor maybe half a dozen times in my Lifetime... and most of those were just to do cool tricks like change the start menu icon. Most other things are fixed by hitting up the control panel, installing new drivers, messing with the active devices, and usually downloading and installing patches.
I've used Ubunutu for about 2 years, and its CLI almost every day.
Grandparent has a point, and I think it can be summed up like as this: Linux needs a REAL "Control Panel." The one that they have now is too shaky and doesn't cover enough ground.
I'm not sure whether to be thrilled that you posted John Galt's Speech, upset that it's just a short summary that leaves out a lot of his best points, or confused since I'm really not sure how it applies to the Anonymity of IP Addresses at _all_.
Ayn Rand hates large government, sure, but the government does many things much more contrary to her cause (Economics, redistribution of wealth, other social programs) than, say, ruling that IP Addresses aren't private.
If I am understanding "Instant run-off" correctly, then people would need to go out and vote more than once per election whenever no Majority candidate were chosen. _That_ would be a mess and us lazy Americans wouldn't stand for it.
A Preferential System based on a Plurality probably _would_ work better and would be really interesting to see in practice.
Microsoft has a compliant version of its flagship operating system without Windows Media Player available under the negotiated name "Windows XP N."[9] In response to the server information requirement, Microsoft released the source code, but not the specifications, to Windows Server 2003 service pack 1 to members of its Work Group Server Protocol Program (WSPP) on the day of the original deadline.[10] Microsoft also appealed the case, and the EU had a week-long hearing over the appeal which ended in April 2006.[11]
In December 2005 the EU announced that it believed Microsoft did not comply fully with the ruling, stating that the company did not disclose appropriate information about its server programs. The EU said that it would begin to fine Microsoft â2 million (US$3.20 million or £1.53 million) a day until it did so.[12] Microsoft stated in June 2006 that it had begun to provide the EU with the requested information, but according to the BBC the EU stated that it was too late.[13]
On 12 July 2006, the EU fined Microsoft for an additional â280.5 million (US$448.58 million), â1.5 million (US$2.39 million) per day from 16 December 2005 to 20 June 2006. The EU threatened to increase the fine to â3 million ($4.80 million) per day on 31 July 2006 if Microsoft did not comply by then.[14]
On 17 September 2007, Microsoft lost their appeal against the European Commission's case. The â497 million fine was upheld, as were the requirements regarding server interoperability information and bundling of Media Player. In addition, Microsoft has to pay 80 percent of the legal costs of the Commission, while the Commission has to pay 20 percent of the legal costs by Microsoft. However, the appeal court rejected the Commission ruling that an independent monitoring trustee should have unlimited access to internal company organization in the future.[15][16] On 22 October 2007, Microsoft announced that it would comply and not appeal the decision any more,[17] and Microsoft did not appeal within the required two months as of 17 November 2007.[18]
Microsoft announced that it will demand 0.4 percent of the revenue (rather than 5.95 percent) in patent-licensing royalties, only from commercial vendors of interoperable software and promised not to seek patent royalties from individual open source developers. The interoperability information alone is available for a one-time fee of â10,000 (US$15,992).[19]
On 27 February 2008, the EU fined Microsoft an additional â899 million (US$1.44 billion) for failure to comply with the March 2004 antitrust decision. This represents the largest penalty ever imposed in 50 years of EU competition policy. This latest decision follows a prior â280.5 million fine for non-compliance, covering the period from June 21, 2006 until October 21, 2007.[20] On 9 May 2008 Microsoft lodged an appeal in the European Court of First Instance seeking to overturn the â899 million fine, officially stating that it intended to use the action as a "constructive effort to seek clarity from the court".[21]
Decide for yourself if you think what they were doing was justified or just a rampage of misplaced power.
I'm sorry, mod me as a troll if you like, but this whole thing reeks of Government putting its nose where it doesn't belong.
The EU tried them a while ago for anti-competitive practices, fined them, and forced them to release a bunch of code. Microsoft complied. The EU came back again and said it wasn't enough, fined them again, and forced them to release more. Yet again, Microsoft complied. Finally, the EU fined them a THIRD time and forced them to release even more code. Microsoft, again, complied.
Then you've got the entire EU saying "We recommend you don't use Windows. Our government isn't going to use Windows, either." which is all well and good, they certainly have that liberty.
Now you've got them suing based on the fact that MS packages a damn browser with their operating system (the one thing 99.99% of people buy computers for) and its anti-trust, too.
Geez, can you leave them alone already? If people want firefox, they can download firefox or opera or anything. If they don't want Windows, there's plenty of free alternatives.
Fine, you think their products suck. Don't use them. Tell other people not to use them. But don't hold a gun to their heads and tell them they can't sell a certain product.
Obligatory car analogy: It's like getting angry at BMW for using BMW driveshafts in their vehicles instead of offering vehicles with all 3rd party driveshafts.
I frequent a forum that gets around it by forcing posters to post in the "New Members" section. That section sometimes gets some spam, sure, but it's at least kept to one forum.
Come on Amazon. It still looks like a plastic toy. For god's sakes, team up with Sony or Apple (kidnap Jonathon Ives). Alternatively, license out your DRM tech so Sony can build a reader compatible with your service.
It actually looks... clunky to me... like an "Electric Book of the Future!" from the 1970s.
The screen appears too small, but that's really because there are far too many buttons, and way too much unused space.
For the price of an iPhone, can't they make it touchscreen?
Worst of all it can not be simply removed, since it is downloaded and installed again once Google Earth is launched. Users really have only two choices: live with it, or uninstall all Google apps.
I didn't think Mac Users cared about doing all of that nerdy fine-tuning and tweaking of their system. I thought their mentality was that things like "file control" and "preferences" were for geeks,
So doesn't this fit in with the "It just works" paradigm?
That's absolutely true for me. I live in an apartment complex with ONE available Internet provider... who is also the cable provider. Short of setting up a satellite or hijacking someone else's Wireless, I have no options but shitty 'Shentel NTC.'
The bandwidth sucks and its always going on and off, but what am I gonna do? It's not worth it to move.
I'm really having a hard time gleaning any actual content from this article. Other than the first paragraph, where Apple is allowing Sony to jack up prices so long as there's no DRM... it really doesn't say much.
There's sensationalist crap about how the companies are "uneasy" with this truce and each one wants the other gone... I'm not really sure why.
The one interesting idea brought to the table was the idea of a "subscription fee" for music... pay a monthly fee and listen to _whatever_ you want. I'm not sure how I feel about that. On the one hand, I kinda like it as a compromise between DRM and piracy, but on the other hand, it doesn't seem like that would _stop_ piracy at all.
Both clerks described the weapon as a Star Trek Klingon type sword, called a "Batleth."
I'm not sure whether to think that since both guys knew a "Bat'leth" on sight, it indicates that geeks are more prevalent than previously thought... or that convenience store clerks tend to be geeks.
Seriously. Different markets, different computers, different users... why should they ALL have the _same_ OS?
Linus Torvalds comes out and says that having hundreds of versions of Linux is a good thing because of different markets, computers, and users, and everyone is like "No duh."
Microsoft makes an OS with a mere 6 versions and suddenly everything is too complicated, a hassle, the upper versions are all malware and the lower versions are all underpowered. Where's the consistency?
I, for one, wish there were MORE choices. I'd like a PERFORMANCE version that's light on the GUI, light on all of the crapware features, but still able to run tons of stuff. Maybe some people want the pretty GUI but not the extra features... maybe some people want the features but not the GUI.
I guess you could have just ONE OS with all of the extra features as add-ons, but what the hell does Joe Sixpack or Grandma Sue know about computers? They'll get the "Home" version for their personal PCs, the "Light" for their netbooks, and the "Business" for their workstations and its almost the same thing.
I don't see much of a problem, except that there's not _enough_ customization.
Slashdot Mirror
I know plenty of people who "Delete" their accounts only to start them up again later. They just don't like being on Facebook/searchable, except on their own time.
I'm sure that there are plenty of people who deactivate Facebook for stupid reasons... a friend sent them a mean message, a cute guy didn't friend them back, etc, and a week later, they want their account back. Facebook lets them get it all back without forcing them to re-upload hundreds of pictures and pages worth of information.
including that picture of you at the beach with your shirt off when you were 17...
I don't think _anyone_ at /. has to worry about that.
I really hope this isn't real, because the article reeks of corruption.
Seriously, being _forced_ to spend $2/trashbag just to throw shit away in? It's obvious that the city is just trying to get money... for $2 you can get like 100 GLAD trashbags.
Don't take this as flamebait... I am looking for honest answers:
How is jailbreaking an iPhone different from removing DRM from a game?
Am I wrong that Jailbreaking an iPhone simply allows you to use more applications on it?
Is this not "Fair Use?"
Is it true that there are free, non-stolen programs that wouldn't normally run on an iPhone without it being Jailbroken?
Or is Jailbreaking simply a means to running pirated iPhone apps?
Just because something isn't ruled explicitly legal doesn't make it illegal, but would definitely help if some day someone wanted to sue over a jailbreak.
That is a subtle, but powerful distinction. Mod insightful.
Please tell me you were being sarcastic...
Obviously. I remember all of the other kids on my block had Foucalt Pendulums but my parents wouldn't let me get one.
But they'll forget about it within a week.
I have to disagree with you _entirely_.
I've grown up with Windows, and I've used the Registry Editor maybe half a dozen times in my Lifetime... and most of those were just to do cool tricks like change the start menu icon. Most other things are fixed by hitting up the control panel, installing new drivers, messing with the active devices, and usually downloading and installing patches.
I've used Ubunutu for about 2 years, and its CLI almost every day.
Grandparent has a point, and I think it can be summed up like as this: Linux needs a REAL "Control Panel." The one that they have now is too shaky and doesn't cover enough ground.
I'm not sure whether to be thrilled that you posted John Galt's Speech, upset that it's just a short summary that leaves out a lot of his best points, or confused since I'm really not sure how it applies to the Anonymity of IP Addresses at _all_.
Ayn Rand hates large government, sure, but the government does many things much more contrary to her cause (Economics, redistribution of wealth, other social programs) than, say, ruling that IP Addresses aren't private.
If I am understanding "Instant run-off" correctly, then people would need to go out and vote more than once per election whenever no Majority candidate were chosen. _That_ would be a mess and us lazy Americans wouldn't stand for it.
A Preferential System based on a Plurality probably _would_ work better and would be really interesting to see in practice.
Microsoft has a compliant version of its flagship operating system without Windows Media Player available under the negotiated name "Windows XP N."[9] In response to the server information requirement, Microsoft released the source code, but not the specifications, to Windows Server 2003 service pack 1 to members of its Work Group Server Protocol Program (WSPP) on the day of the original deadline.[10] Microsoft also appealed the case, and the EU had a week-long hearing over the appeal which ended in April 2006.[11]
In December 2005 the EU announced that it believed Microsoft did not comply fully with the ruling, stating that the company did not disclose appropriate information about its server programs. The EU said that it would begin to fine Microsoft â2 million (US$3.20 million or £1.53 million) a day until it did so.[12] Microsoft stated in June 2006 that it had begun to provide the EU with the requested information, but according to the BBC the EU stated that it was too late.[13]
On 12 July 2006, the EU fined Microsoft for an additional â280.5 million (US$448.58 million), â1.5 million (US$2.39 million) per day from 16 December 2005 to 20 June 2006. The EU threatened to increase the fine to â3 million ($4.80 million) per day on 31 July 2006 if Microsoft did not comply by then.[14]
On 17 September 2007, Microsoft lost their appeal against the European Commission's case. The â497 million fine was upheld, as were the requirements regarding server interoperability information and bundling of Media Player. In addition, Microsoft has to pay 80 percent of the legal costs of the Commission, while the Commission has to pay 20 percent of the legal costs by Microsoft. However, the appeal court rejected the Commission ruling that an independent monitoring trustee should have unlimited access to internal company organization in the future.[15][16] On 22 October 2007, Microsoft announced that it would comply and not appeal the decision any more,[17] and Microsoft did not appeal within the required two months as of 17 November 2007.[18]
Microsoft announced that it will demand 0.4 percent of the revenue (rather than 5.95 percent) in patent-licensing royalties, only from commercial vendors of interoperable software and promised not to seek patent royalties from individual open source developers. The interoperability information alone is available for a one-time fee of â10,000 (US$15,992).[19]
On 27 February 2008, the EU fined Microsoft an additional â899 million (US$1.44 billion) for failure to comply with the March 2004 antitrust decision. This represents the largest penalty ever imposed in 50 years of EU competition policy. This latest decision follows a prior â280.5 million fine for non-compliance, covering the period from June 21, 2006 until October 21, 2007.[20] On 9 May 2008 Microsoft lodged an appeal in the European Court of First Instance seeking to overturn the â899 million fine, officially stating that it intended to use the action as a "constructive effort to seek clarity from the court".[21]
Decide for yourself if you think what they were doing was justified or just a rampage of misplaced power.
I'm sorry, mod me as a troll if you like, but this whole thing reeks of Government putting its nose where it doesn't belong.
The EU tried them a while ago for anti-competitive practices, fined them, and forced them to release a bunch of code. Microsoft complied. The EU came back again and said it wasn't enough, fined them again, and forced them to release more. Yet again, Microsoft complied. Finally, the EU fined them a THIRD time and forced them to release even more code. Microsoft, again, complied.
Then you've got the entire EU saying "We recommend you don't use Windows. Our government isn't going to use Windows, either." which is all well and good, they certainly have that liberty.
Now you've got them suing based on the fact that MS packages a damn browser with their operating system (the one thing 99.99% of people buy computers for) and its anti-trust, too.
Geez, can you leave them alone already? If people want firefox, they can download firefox or opera or anything. If they don't want Windows, there's plenty of free alternatives.
Fine, you think their products suck. Don't use them. Tell other people not to use them. But don't hold a gun to their heads and tell them they can't sell a certain product.
Obligatory car analogy: It's like getting angry at BMW for using BMW driveshafts in their vehicles instead of offering vehicles with all 3rd party driveshafts.
I frequent a forum that gets around it by forcing posters to post in the "New Members" section. That section sometimes gets some spam, sure, but it's at least kept to one forum.
Hey, who wants to chip in and buy some copies for the slashdot editors?
Come on Amazon. It still looks like a plastic toy. For god's sakes, team up with Sony or Apple (kidnap Jonathon Ives). Alternatively, license out your DRM tech so Sony can build a reader compatible with your service.
It actually looks... clunky to me... like an "Electric Book of the Future!" from the 1970s.
The screen appears too small, but that's really because there are far too many buttons, and way too much unused space.
For the price of an iPhone, can't they make it touchscreen?
No, because that makes far too much sense.
Worst of all it can not be simply removed, since it is downloaded and installed again once Google Earth is launched. Users really have only two choices: live with it, or uninstall all Google apps.
I didn't think Mac Users cared about doing all of that nerdy fine-tuning and tweaking of their system. I thought their mentality was that things like "file control" and "preferences" were for geeks,
So doesn't this fit in with the "It just works" paradigm?
That's absolutely true for me. I live in an apartment complex with ONE available Internet provider... who is also the cable provider. Short of setting up a satellite or hijacking someone else's Wireless, I have no options but shitty 'Shentel NTC.'
The bandwidth sucks and its always going on and off, but what am I gonna do? It's not worth it to move.
No, it was found in my Trousers.
I'm really having a hard time gleaning any actual content from this article. Other than the first paragraph, where Apple is allowing Sony to jack up prices so long as there's no DRM... it really doesn't say much.
There's sensationalist crap about how the companies are "uneasy" with this truce and each one wants the other gone... I'm not really sure why.
The one interesting idea brought to the table was the idea of a "subscription fee" for music... pay a monthly fee and listen to _whatever_ you want. I'm not sure how I feel about that. On the one hand, I kinda like it as a compromise between DRM and piracy, but on the other hand, it doesn't seem like that would _stop_ piracy at all.
Both clerks described the weapon as a Star Trek Klingon type sword, called a "Batleth."
I'm not sure whether to think that since both guys knew a "Bat'leth" on sight, it indicates that geeks are more prevalent than previously thought... or that convenience store clerks tend to be geeks.
Seriously. Different markets, different computers, different users... why should they ALL have the _same_ OS?
Linus Torvalds comes out and says that having hundreds of versions of Linux is a good thing because of different markets, computers, and users, and everyone is like "No duh."
Microsoft makes an OS with a mere 6 versions and suddenly everything is too complicated, a hassle, the upper versions are all malware and the lower versions are all underpowered. Where's the consistency?
I, for one, wish there were MORE choices. I'd like a PERFORMANCE version that's light on the GUI, light on all of the crapware features, but still able to run tons of stuff. Maybe some people want the pretty GUI but not the extra features... maybe some people want the features but not the GUI.
I guess you could have just ONE OS with all of the extra features as add-ons, but what the hell does Joe Sixpack or Grandma Sue know about computers? They'll get the "Home" version for their personal PCs, the "Light" for their netbooks, and the "Business" for their workstations and its almost the same thing.
I don't see much of a problem, except that there's not _enough_ customization.
Can we get a link to the Porn?
I googled "Porn" and nothing came up.
Agreed. It got pretty Raunchy. Hell, I was watching it with my College Buddies and _we_ were surprised they got away with it.
There's also objectivism:
"Because I want to, you dirty hippie."