Why is it that I can sign for service from a provider, that provider can change the rules of the game by sending me a letter saying "these are our new rules...by continuing to use...you agree...", and then call me a thief when I continue to use the service in the manner which was acceptable to them when I first subscribed?
That's ridiculous; by that logic someone can complain because they can't keep paying the same telephone service rates they had back in 1950. Who said that contracts can't change? Certainly not your provider, which is why I'm sure they had a section in the contract saying that the terms could change.
I saw Quake III in that big cookie tin at EBX for 9.99 several months ago. There was this big sticker on it saying (to paraphrase) "Convert this game for PC use with a free download". Was tempted to buy it, but I just find Quake too depressingly violent to be fun.
Encryption wouldn't do much in this case; if the FBI comes in with a warrant, they're going to want them decrypted. What are you going to say to them? "Uhhh, they're unreadable, because they've all been encrypted. And we lost the key."
Of course, encryption makes it easier to obstruct justice, but the people involved generally place more value on their own freedom and career rather than their company's welfare (as they should).
SCO OpenServer has a huge userbase where I am; the PATH trains that run from New Jersey to Manhattan have in on their fare vending machines. At least I THINK it's OpenServer; I saw one where the graphical menu system had failed, and I'm fairly sure there was a little SCO OpenServer message. This is totally off-topic, I know, I just get a little thrill from seeing UNIX used in weird places...
And I have a second task as well. Slashdot is occasionally criticized for getting a story wrong, even though we diligently correct ourselves when necessary. My theory is that the difference between Slashdot and other media is that they never correct themselves, no matter how inaccurate, so readers are left with a false picture of accuracy.
Now wait just a minute. Every paper has a retractions section, and are usually very prompt in retracting things they get wrong. Your theory with all due respect, is completely and utterly wrong.
Slashdot occasionally will retract things, but I think "diligent" is going a little overboard. And the retractions slashdot DOES print are usually very vague and defensive (when was the last time you saw "We made a mistake and didn't research this enough"; it's usually "Uhh this may not be totally accurate").
Secondly, what exactly would they retract in this case? This is the story: "Irish engineer claims to have invented free energy machine". Which is totally accurate. Now most people here would agree that they shouldn't have even given this guy any attention, but the article does cast a lot of doubt on whether it works.
FINALLY, as someone who has worked with newswire feeds, I can assure you that they often DO run retractions, but these take the form of advisories along the lines of "Article portrays incorrect information; it should read ". It's up to the individual newpapers to decide how to handle it, whether to withdraw the article, correct it, or print a retraction.
I know I'm kind of going on a rant here, but this was a ridiculous claim. I like slashdot, but I really don't think the editors are entitled to take a high-handed position on editorial fact-checking. Look how often stories are summarized inaccurately, or old news is portrayed as new, or stories are repeated, or incendiary editorial comments are thrown in to skew the story.
Umm...yes, I had already read that, I don't see how the identity of their monarch affects what I said.
Curiously enough, the Queen seems to actually wield some power in Tuvalu's case, appointing (via the Governor-General) the cabinet after consulting with the prime minister. Then the cabinet elects the next prime minister. Actually an interesting little closed system, with power circulating among a few people who can continually vote themselves another term. Not exactly democratic, but I think it's hard for a state with a population of 10,000 (less than half the size of my old college!) to be truly despotic.
There's nothing wrong with students being involved in research; indeed they should be, that's one of the reasons they go to college. But the MIT Media Lab attracts some of the best people in their individual fields, and to imply that it's the students who drive the research there detracts from the accomplishments of the professional scientists who work there.
They probably figure that since nobody seems to actually READ the articles they post, nobody will notice if their editorial comments conflict with reality.
I wish him luck, but isn't everyone and their brother trying to figure out how to integrate GPS, handheld PCs, communications devices, etc. into a handheld? And not a lot of people seem to be buying.
Oh well, I guess if anyone could come up with something truly innovative, it would be him...
How did government ever obtain to the right to tell me how to raise my kids?
Because you weren't doing a good enough job.
Before you all erupt in mindless rage, I'm not referring to anyone specifically; this law, like most laws that attempt to regulate parenting, was done in response to a problem.
I'm not saying it's a correct response. I'm not saying it's moral. I'm not even saying it's Constitutional. But the automatic negative characterization by people on these forums of those who try to deal with these problems is just pathetic. These are NOT comic-opera villains passing laws simply out of a desire to restrict YOUR freedoms, as they twirl their long black moustachios and chortle gleefully. They're not always ambitious and greedy bureaucrats bent on advancing their career by passing frivolous legislation.
Quite often they're dealing with serious problems that don't have easy answers, and the fact that so many people here try to reduce everything to such simplistic terms reflects poorly on this community. Instead of complaining, why not suggest an alternate method of dealing with the problem?
Yep, now they'll be able to do the "Miracle on 34th Street" defense in court.
(after having hundreds of demo CDs poured onto Judge Kotar-Kelly's desk)
"As you can see, your honor, the US Postal Service, a gen-yoo-wine branch of the US Government, recognizes Microsoft's right to "innovate".
Case dismissed!
It's very sexy to support programmers who fight 'bad' encryption routines, 'ludicrous' copyright schemes, and the like, but when it comes to skript k1ddi5 hacking OUR stuff, we want to string them up by thier fingernails.
Huh? The most common reaction on slashdot to DDoS is to criticize everyone except the people who actually did it (ISPs, security software manufacturers, etc). Very few people here call for the stringing-up-by-the-fingernails remedy for the little punks who did it.
Yeah, look how they've been running CNN into the ground. It's still the best cable news channel, but their idiotic attempt to "spice things up" is just pathetic.
Slashdot Mirror
Why is it that I can sign for service from a provider, that provider can change the rules of the game by sending me a letter saying "these are our new rules...by continuing to use...you agree...", and then call me a thief when I continue to use the service in the manner which was acceptable to them when I first subscribed?
That's ridiculous; by that logic someone can complain because they can't keep paying the same telephone service rates they had back in 1950. Who said that contracts can't change? Certainly not your provider, which is why I'm sure they had a section in the contract saying that the terms could change.
Their weight in gold? How many truly successful commercial linux enterprise software companies are there?
I saw Quake III in that big cookie tin at EBX for 9.99 several months ago. There was this big sticker on it saying (to paraphrase) "Convert this game for PC use with a free download". Was tempted to buy it, but I just find Quake too depressingly violent to be fun.
Cure people by using -cyber in really annoying, nonsensical ways on them.
Cybersalad. Cybersushi. Cyberglue. Cybersoapstone. Cybercow. Cybersandwich. Cyberdoily.
One word: encrypt.
Encryption wouldn't do much in this case; if the FBI comes in with a warrant, they're going to want them decrypted. What are you going to say to them? "Uhhh, they're unreadable, because they've all been encrypted. And we lost the key."
Of course, encryption makes it easier to obstruct justice, but the people involved generally place more value on their own freedom and career rather than their company's welfare (as they should).
SCO OpenServer has a huge userbase where I am; the PATH trains that run from New Jersey to Manhattan have in on their fare vending machines. At least I THINK it's OpenServer; I saw one where the graphical menu system had failed, and I'm fairly sure there was a little SCO OpenServer message. This is totally off-topic, I know, I just get a little thrill from seeing UNIX used in weird places...
And I have a second task as well. Slashdot is occasionally criticized for getting a story wrong, even though we diligently correct ourselves when necessary. My theory is that the difference between Slashdot and other media is that they never correct themselves, no matter how inaccurate, so readers are left with a false picture of accuracy.
Now wait just a minute. Every paper has a retractions section, and are usually very prompt in retracting things they get wrong. Your theory with all due respect, is completely and utterly wrong.
Slashdot occasionally will retract things, but I think "diligent" is going a little overboard. And the retractions slashdot DOES print are usually very vague and defensive (when was the last time you saw "We made a mistake and didn't research this enough"; it's usually "Uhh this may not be totally accurate").
Secondly, what exactly would they retract in this case? This is the story: "Irish engineer claims to have invented free energy machine". Which is totally accurate. Now most people here would agree that they shouldn't have even given this guy any attention, but the article does cast a lot of doubt on whether it works.
FINALLY, as someone who has worked with newswire feeds, I can assure you that they often DO run retractions, but these take the form of advisories along the lines of "Article portrays incorrect information; it should read ". It's up to the individual newpapers to decide how to handle it, whether to withdraw the article, correct it, or print a retraction.
I know I'm kind of going on a rant here, but this was a ridiculous claim. I like slashdot, but I really don't think the editors are entitled to take a high-handed position on editorial fact-checking. Look how often stories are summarized inaccurately, or old news is portrayed as new, or stories are repeated, or incendiary editorial comments are thrown in to skew the story.
Of course this story is worth discussion; well, not the spurious scientific claims, but the fact that news organizations are treating it seriously.
Umm...yes, I had already read that, I don't see how the identity of their monarch affects what I said.
Curiously enough, the Queen seems to actually wield some power in Tuvalu's case, appointing (via the Governor-General) the cabinet after consulting with the prime minister. Then the cabinet elects the next prime minister. Actually an interesting little closed system, with power circulating among a few people who can continually vote themselves another term. Not exactly democratic, but I think it's hard for a state with a population of 10,000 (less than half the size of my old college!) to be truly despotic.
There's nothing wrong with students being involved in research; indeed they should be, that's one of the reasons they go to college. But the MIT Media Lab attracts some of the best people in their individual fields, and to imply that it's the students who drive the research there detracts from the accomplishments of the professional scientists who work there.
These "kids" are cutting edge innovators.
No, they're "kids". The cutting edge innovators are the professors and research fellows.
Being a graduate of a public university that, like many, was in a constant state of budget crisis, I'm even less sympathetic.
According to the CIA world factbook it's a constitutional monarchy. Of 10,000 people. Which just quintupled it's GDP.
.tv domain names?
What I don't understand is how they can sell it twice; I thought they already sold it a while ago.
I'm not sure why Verisign would give that much. I mean, does anyone actually buy
Not everything has a price tag you know...
They probably figure that since nobody seems to actually READ the articles they post, nobody will notice if their editorial comments conflict with reality.
I wish him luck, but isn't everyone and their brother trying to figure out how to integrate GPS, handheld PCs, communications devices, etc. into a handheld? And not a lot of people seem to be buying.
Oh well, I guess if anyone could come up with something truly innovative, it would be him...
How did government ever obtain to the right to tell me how to raise my kids?
Because you weren't doing a good enough job.
Before you all erupt in mindless rage, I'm not referring to anyone specifically; this law, like most laws that attempt to regulate parenting, was done in response to a problem.
I'm not saying it's a correct response. I'm not saying it's moral. I'm not even saying it's Constitutional. But the automatic negative characterization by people on these forums of those who try to deal with these problems is just pathetic. These are NOT comic-opera villains passing laws simply out of a desire to restrict YOUR freedoms, as they twirl their long black moustachios and chortle gleefully. They're not always ambitious and greedy bureaucrats bent on advancing their career by passing frivolous legislation.
Quite often they're dealing with serious problems that don't have easy answers, and the fact that so many people here try to reduce everything to such simplistic terms reflects poorly on this community. Instead of complaining, why not suggest an alternate method of dealing with the problem?
Huh? Are you sure you're not thinking of westlaw? I was under the impression that lexis/nexus was almost exclusively used by journalists...
or even abide by the laws themselves... Most cops I see drive like crazy retards when off-duty, happily breaking traffic laws
How do you know they're cops if they're off-duty?
And yes, I realize I royally messed up the Judge's name.
Yep, now they'll be able to do the "Miracle on 34th Street" defense in court.
(after having hundreds of demo CDs poured onto Judge Kotar-Kelly's desk)
"As you can see, your honor, the US Postal Service, a gen-yoo-wine branch of the US Government, recognizes Microsoft's right to "innovate".
Case dismissed!
It's very sexy to support programmers who fight 'bad' encryption routines, 'ludicrous' copyright schemes, and the like, but when it comes to skript k1ddi5 hacking OUR stuff, we want to string them up by thier fingernails.
Huh? The most common reaction on slashdot to DDoS is to criticize everyone except the people who actually did it (ISPs, security software manufacturers, etc). Very few people here call for the stringing-up-by-the-fingernails remedy for the little punks who did it.
But it WASN'T a solid business plan; even they admitted that they definitely overextended (gardening tools? why on earth would you sell those).
and GMA's not as irritating.
And that's really saying something...
Yeah, look how they've been running CNN into the ground. It's still the best cable news channel, but their idiotic attempt to "spice things up" is just pathetic.