I think you missed the point (or maybe I misunderstood what everyone is saying). With tax exemption, new members pay x%. If COS did not have tax exemption, new members would pay (x+y)%, where y is a positive number. This means that, in theory, without tax exemption there should not be as many members since the cost to join is higher.
it suddenly becomes ignorant to mock nearly any belief.
While there are those who mock the actual beliefs of others, I like to think most people's apparent mocking is actually directed towards the pushiness of some people with regard to their beliefs.
You mean to say that you have been convinced of something after watching a fictional movie, and later found out it wasn't true? Well.. I admire your ability to admit that.
If that were 100% true, then children would always share the same religious beliefs as their parents, and I can tell you right now that I certainly do not share my parent's religious beliefs.
(No I am not going to tell you what my beliefs are or those of my parents, I want to leave this intentionally ambiguous.)
Re:So what if you own one of these machines?
on
Psystar Crushed In Court
·
· Score: 2, Informative
The very first post seemed to suggest that some company setup the Psystar company to get precedent that Mac clones are legally allowed. GGP's post says that it was Apple in order to show that Mac clones are legally disallowed.
Lets try this...
Lets say I'm Jewish. For whatever reason, I decide to change to Christianity. Nothing about the universe has changed, reality is still exactly the same as when I was Jewish. That is the only thing I am talking about, and that I suspect is what jcr meant when he said your beliefs have no affect on reality.
Perhaps I inferred incorrectly, but I took the method described as basically pointing a video camera at the computer monitor and recording the show like that (taking advantage of the analog hole). Only instead of a physical video camera, you use a WYSIWYG video capture program to record what is displayed on the screen. Since you're recording the resulting image and not the stream used to create the image, there will be no user ID in the resultant file.
Though I guess they could try and watermark the user ID into the image itself by shifting a few pixels a few bits off the original color. That way to the naked eye every stream looks the same, but on a closer inspection pixel 123 is ff0001 on one stream and ff0002 on another. But I suspect that any watermark undetectable to the naked eye would also be tiny enough that when the output from the WYSIWYG program is encoded, any ability to link the file to a single account would be lost.
Like revoking the online key that unlocks the encryption? Or embedding a time stamp in the file?
Since the discussion is about why someone would want to have a local copy of the file when they could just stream it, more like how the library of streamable content on Netflix constantly changes (some stuff seems to be perma-up, but there are streams that are available only for a limited time.
Given that I was only able to find one burnt copy of Office Pro with a Google-able CD-Key, and that version of Office is on at least 20 computers, I'm not convinced.
To be fair, the copies of Windows XP that my university had for sale to students all used the same CD key, and googling for it reveals hundreds of sites with the same key listed. I believe such a thing is said to be "site licensed".
Whether or not I believe in invisible sky daddies, flying spaghetti monsters, invisible pink unicorns, or whatever, has zero affect on what does and does not happen within the realm of reality. What I believe may influence how I interact with that reality, but that is not the same thing as directly affecting that reality.
It seems I may have misunderstood what you meant by "the result is the same". You're referring to "produce the same product", right? Because I was originally treating that as "produce a different product which performs the same function". I know that the incandescent bulb and the fluorescent bulb produce light via different methods, but their function is the same.
It doesn't allow for duplication if the result is the same.
Bullshit.
In an episode of Modern Marvels about Nikola Tesla I believe it was, they'd mentioned how, since Edison had patented his light bulb, he was able to disallow Tesla from using that design at the World's Fair. So Tesla invented his own florescent bulbs. End result is the same (produce light), yet there was no patent infringement on the part of Nikola Tesla.
If they specifically cripple the engine so that it doesn't work unless its attached to a porsche branded car then thats sueworthy
If what they sold you was a generic car engine, then you're right. But if what they sold you was a Porsche engine, specifically engineered to work in a Porsche chasis, then no, that's not sueworthy.
especially if they somehow change the engine AFTER purchase!
If they broke into your garage and installed the modification, yes. If they sent you a box with a letter that said "hey, we're issuing a recall on this engine part, here's the new part for you to install", and you went ahead and installed that new part without even checking if the engine would still function in your unsupported chasis, that's your own fault.
The general population, IE you and me, are NOT very high on that list for some strange reason.. A government "by the people, for the people" vanished long ago.
Wow. I'm sick with what our government has become about as much as anyone else around here, but that's stretching it a bit, don't you think? Are you even aware for how long the SOR would last? According to Wikipedia, only about 34 days.
Dammit... hate when "Post Anonymously" gets checked any I don't realize it.
I'm curious if apple even has the legal right to restrict installation to apple hardware.
You're looking at this backwards. It's not that they have a legal right to restrict installation to Apple hardware, but rather they do not have a requirement (legal or otherwise) to keep it working and able to be installed on non-Apple hardware.
If you go out and buy a 360 game, you expect it to only work on a 360. If someone were to somehow build their own 360, and a later update to the game makes it not work on that self-built 360, regardless of if Microsoft simply patched a hole which allowed the game to run on unofficial hardware or they specifically targeted self-built 360s, they were perfectly within their rights and there is zero recourse for you to force them to make it work again.
If it's presented after purchase, then you are not obliged to agree to it.
That makes about as much sense as saying that if you don't realize until after purchasing the 360 game that it may not run on your unofficial hardware, then you are not obliged to agree to it. You can disagree with the notion that it isn't working all you want, that won't make it magically work.:P
Yet if the store you're supposed to return it to says "all sales final" then wouldn't apple be on the hook for handling refunds of the "refused to consent to the EULA" variety?
For the purposes of this discussion, the EULA is irrelevant. It's only purpose is to tell people to not try and install on non-Apple hardware. Apple could trash the entire EULA, and they'd still be under no requirement to restore Atom support.
I referenced a site that you have to pay to get the answers to [...] Or you can just scroll down to see the answers, but that's not the point.
Wait, I thought that was exactly the point. robots.txt is not the answer because then anyone searching Google would never be directed to a Murdoch site. The real answer is to obfuscate the results such that Google can still find it, but that the average person clicking through will think that they need to pay.
Yet you two don't want to do anything until the death toll passes the normal annual figure.
You're putting words in peoples mouths. No one said to do nothing, just that making Swine Flu into a bigger deal than the regular flu (did your research reveal that the regular flu virus is different every year?) is pointless.
Or is there something about the Swine Flu virus that makes it more dangerous than "just another flu virus variant"?
Actually, that doesn't sound like such a bad idea. "Free" (read, paid for via everyone's taxes) lodging, food, exercise equipment access, no worries about paying taxes or bills. With nothing left to lose (except maybe one's black cherry), doesn't sound all that bad.
While the first two are perhaps ambiguous (although why are you clicking unknown links at work?), with a name like nakedgirls4.jpg, you can't honestly have expected puppies and kittens, could you?
Slashdot Mirror
I think you missed the point (or maybe I misunderstood what everyone is saying). With tax exemption, new members pay x%. If COS did not have tax exemption, new members would pay (x+y)%, where y is a positive number. This means that, in theory, without tax exemption there should not be as many members since the cost to join is higher.
Personally, the subject has never come up for me, since I never, ever, ever (really, swear to Ceiling Cat) buy anything on the internet....
But have you ever physically left your state, bought something, and brought that something back home with you?
it suddenly becomes ignorant to mock nearly any belief.
While there are those who mock the actual beliefs of others, I like to think most people's apparent mocking is actually directed towards the pushiness of some people with regard to their beliefs.
You mean to say that you have been convinced of something after watching a fictional movie, and later found out it wasn't true? Well.. I admire your ability to admit that.
If that were 100% true, then children would always share the same religious beliefs as their parents, and I can tell you right now that I certainly do not share my parent's religious beliefs.
(No I am not going to tell you what my beliefs are or those of my parents, I want to leave this intentionally ambiguous.)
The very first post seemed to suggest that some company setup the Psystar company to get precedent that Mac clones are legally allowed. GGP's post says that it was Apple in order to show that Mac clones are legally disallowed.
Lets try this...
Lets say I'm Jewish. For whatever reason, I decide to change to Christianity. Nothing about the universe has changed, reality is still exactly the same as when I was Jewish. That is the only thing I am talking about, and that I suspect is what jcr meant when he said your beliefs have no affect on reality.
Perhaps I inferred incorrectly, but I took the method described as basically pointing a video camera at the computer monitor and recording the show like that (taking advantage of the analog hole). Only instead of a physical video camera, you use a WYSIWYG video capture program to record what is displayed on the screen. Since you're recording the resulting image and not the stream used to create the image, there will be no user ID in the resultant file.
Though I guess they could try and watermark the user ID into the image itself by shifting a few pixels a few bits off the original color. That way to the naked eye every stream looks the same, but on a closer inspection pixel 123 is ff0001 on one stream and ff0002 on another. But I suspect that any watermark undetectable to the naked eye would also be tiny enough that when the output from the WYSIWYG program is encoded, any ability to link the file to a single account would be lost.
Like revoking the online key that unlocks the encryption? Or embedding a time stamp in the file?
Since the discussion is about why someone would want to have a local copy of the file when they could just stream it, more like how the library of streamable content on Netflix constantly changes (some stuff seems to be perma-up, but there are streams that are available only for a limited time.
Given that I was only able to find one burnt copy of Office Pro with a Google-able CD-Key, and that version of Office is on at least 20 computers, I'm not convinced.
To be fair, the copies of Windows XP that my university had for sale to students all used the same CD key, and googling for it reveals hundreds of sites with the same key listed. I believe such a thing is said to be "site licensed".
Any worshiper would reply God doesn't have what you call a penis.
But if man was created in His image, anything a man has, so too should He, right?
Way to twist jcr's words.
Whether or not I believe in invisible sky daddies, flying spaghetti monsters, invisible pink unicorns, or whatever, has zero affect on what does and does not happen within the realm of reality. What I believe may influence how I interact with that reality, but that is not the same thing as directly affecting that reality.
It seems I may have misunderstood what you meant by "the result is the same". You're referring to "produce the same product", right? Because I was originally treating that as "produce a different product which performs the same function". I know that the incandescent bulb and the fluorescent bulb produce light via different methods, but their function is the same.
It doesn't allow for duplication if the result is the same.
Bullshit.
In an episode of Modern Marvels about Nikola Tesla I believe it was, they'd mentioned how, since Edison had patented his light bulb, he was able to disallow Tesla from using that design at the World's Fair. So Tesla invented his own florescent bulbs. End result is the same (produce light), yet there was no patent infringement on the part of Nikola Tesla.
If they specifically cripple the engine so that it doesn't work unless its attached to a porsche branded car then thats sueworthy
If what they sold you was a generic car engine, then you're right. But if what they sold you was a Porsche engine, specifically engineered to work in a Porsche chasis, then no, that's not sueworthy.
especially if they somehow change the engine AFTER purchase!
If they broke into your garage and installed the modification, yes. If they sent you a box with a letter that said "hey, we're issuing a recall on this engine part, here's the new part for you to install", and you went ahead and installed that new part without even checking if the engine would still function in your unsupported chasis, that's your own fault.
The general population, IE you and me, are NOT very high on that list for some strange reason.. A government "by the people, for the people" vanished long ago.
Wow. I'm sick with what our government has become about as much as anyone else around here, but that's stretching it a bit, don't you think? Are you even aware for how long the SOR would last? According to Wikipedia, only about 34 days.
I'm curious if apple even has the legal right to restrict installation to apple hardware.
You're looking at this backwards. It's not that they have a legal right to restrict installation to Apple hardware, but rather they do not have a requirement (legal or otherwise) to keep it working and able to be installed on non-Apple hardware. If you go out and buy a 360 game, you expect it to only work on a 360. If someone were to somehow build their own 360, and a later update to the game makes it not work on that self-built 360, regardless of if Microsoft simply patched a hole which allowed the game to run on unofficial hardware or they specifically targeted self-built 360s, they were perfectly within their rights and there is zero recourse for you to force them to make it work again.
If it's presented after purchase, then you are not obliged to agree to it.
That makes about as much sense as saying that if you don't realize until after purchasing the 360 game that it may not run on your unofficial hardware, then you are not obliged to agree to it. You can disagree with the notion that it isn't working all you want, that won't make it magically work. :P
Yet if the store you're supposed to return it to says "all sales final" then wouldn't apple be on the hook for handling refunds of the "refused to consent to the EULA" variety?
For the purposes of this discussion, the EULA is irrelevant. It's only purpose is to tell people to not try and install on non-Apple hardware. Apple could trash the entire EULA, and they'd still be under no requirement to restore Atom support.
I believe peragrin is referring to this, although I don't really understand how it breaks all USB devices.
So, until we have a viable alternative, why not use our domestic resources?
From a strategic standpoint, wouldn't it be better to wait till we've exhausted the oil supplies from everyone else before we start using our own?
I referenced a site that you have to pay to get the answers to [...] Or you can just scroll down to see the answers, but that's not the point.
Wait, I thought that was exactly the point. robots.txt is not the answer because then anyone searching Google would never be directed to a Murdoch site. The real answer is to obfuscate the results such that Google can still find it, but that the average person clicking through will think that they need to pay.
1 body/neck, 2 arms, 2 legs. What, are you into amputees or something?
Third, don't the Jewish believe just the old testament?
Yet you two don't want to do anything until the death toll passes the normal annual figure.
You're putting words in peoples mouths. No one said to do nothing, just that making Swine Flu into a bigger deal than the regular flu (did your research reveal that the regular flu virus is different every year?) is pointless.
Or is there something about the Swine Flu virus that makes it more dangerous than "just another flu virus variant"?
what more can they do to me?
They could throw you in jail?
Actually, that doesn't sound like such a bad idea. "Free" (read, paid for via everyone's taxes) lodging, food, exercise equipment access, no worries about paying taxes or bills. With nothing left to lose (except maybe one's black cherry), doesn't sound all that bad.
While the first two are perhaps ambiguous (although why are you clicking unknown links at work?), with a name like nakedgirls4.jpg, you can't honestly have expected puppies and kittens, could you?