that this would work, at least for me. I'm a programmer in a R&D lab, and I need to interact with my peers. I mean, you can call them, but I usually get voice mail and the response time is pretty bad. Email works better, but ironically, more often than not, I run into the these people in the halls or in one of the many labs when I have a question. There's other reasons that this wouldn't work for me, but the above reason seems applicable to just about anyone (except those that can work entirely independant, and those that prefer to reduce there human interaction, anyway).
It seems to me that with all this legislation going on as of late about what can and can't be done with digital data is gonna come back and bite these very same instigators/supporters in the posterior.
I know... there's probably some loopholes for these guys to take in just such a circumstance, but it'd be nice to see some poetic justice...:/
If the lifetime of these memory blocks were limited to a small number of reads before needing to be replaced/refreshed, I think this could be the next candiate for the MPAA's replacement for the DVD!
However, Microsoft has admitted Linux to be a major competitor and cause of concern. Can we really expect them to begin porting softare to run under *nix?
I'd go with diversification of my product platforms. Linux has a steadily increasing user base, and most of these users don't give a rodent's Glutius Maximus about whether or not MS is providing applications for the *nix users.
However, if MS were to start providing interoperability (and not immediately breaking it), many of these users might be inclined to purchace MS Offix 2001, and not write it off as a POS product just because it has MS in the name.
I don't like the concept that we can't give it back to him, because it MIGHT be bad.
If I had a little black box that was confiscated, would the argument that it MIGHT be some kind of weapon be ample reason for the law enforcers to not return my black box. To extend this logic, could they confiscate my bank accounts because I MIGHT do something destructive with the money, or that the money MIGHT be the spoils of my previous crime?
You MIGHT have noticed the gratuitous use of a specific word. It's this little word that worries me a great deal about any precedents that may arise from this event.
Slashdot Mirror
that this would work, at least for me. I'm a programmer in a R&D lab, and I need to interact with my peers. I mean, you can call them, but I usually get voice mail and the response time is pretty bad. Email works better, but ironically, more often than not, I run into the these people in the halls or in one of the many labs when I have a question. There's other reasons that this wouldn't work for me, but the above reason seems applicable to just about anyone (except those that can work entirely independant, and those that prefer to reduce there human interaction, anyway).
The Other Nate
It seems to me that with all this legislation going on as of late about what can and can't be done with digital data is gonna come back and bite these very same instigators/supporters in the posterior.
:/
I know... there's probably some loopholes for these guys to take in just such a circumstance, but it'd be nice to see some poetic justice...
Nate
If the lifetime of these memory blocks were limited to a small number of reads before needing to be replaced/refreshed, I think this could be the next candiate for the MPAA's replacement for the DVD!
The Other Nate
I'd go with diversification of my product platforms. Linux has a steadily increasing user base, and most of these users don't give a rodent's Glutius Maximus about whether or not MS is providing applications for the *nix users.
However, if MS were to start providing interoperability (and not immediately breaking it), many of these users might be inclined to purchace MS Offix 2001, and not write it off as a POS product just because it has MS in the name.
The Other Nate
I don't like the concept that we can't give it back to him, because it MIGHT be bad.
If I had a little black box that was confiscated, would the argument that it MIGHT be some kind of weapon be ample reason for the law enforcers to not return my black box. To extend this logic, could they confiscate my bank accounts because I MIGHT do something destructive with the money, or that the money MIGHT be the spoils of my previous crime?
You MIGHT have noticed the gratuitous use of a specific word. It's this little word that worries me a great deal about any precedents that may arise from this event.
The Other Nate