I know you're just cutting swathes into lesser beings for trolling's sake, but you do have a slight truth in the anti-intellectual angle. However, this comes from the segrigation that schools naturally impose on their students, not from a society imposed choice of moral or value system. Challenge or Honors classes are set aside and rarely "spill" into the rest of the pack for scheduling reasons. I can speak from personal experience and say that this creates an artificial but still very real barrier between those who chose to take a challenge and those who don't. There's certainly friction between the two. It's additionally compounded when you enter lower-level classes (for students who, for example, don't pass the basic skills test mandated by one of the governments).
That seems a bit red herring to me. Why isn't there a bigger interest in computers? Football, obviously.
I understand the use of your example, but here's the problem: Football is just entertainment. It's an out of school sport, and the teachers at my old high school (I graduated last year, if anyone was wondering) didn't let the players get any slack; any more for the kids who spent their night watching TV or running around the lake. This was certainly not the norm, but it was a breath of fresh air after middle school.
The reason why a lot of kids at my high school hated technology was that it hated them. Their only interaction with computers was a plethora of broken, buggy, useless Windows XP machines with a haphazard security system and more oddities and crashes than the machines of your nightmares. (Oh, and that was considered the "good" lab - the bad lab had old Mac OS 9 computers that could barely run Word.) Now throw some kids in a basic computers class and watch the frustration stream across their faces. No wonder they thought that those of us who knew how those bastards worked were magical wizards - in a sense, we were.
I actually booted up a LiveCD of Fedora once to keep myself sane. The admin at the time wouldn't let me back on the machines after than (until he retired).
The old ones are easily $300 used, probably less. Getting the Linux-compatable units new is still possible, as well - they haven't purged the retail stores of all the fats just yet.
I use whatever works on my machine. Fedora is usually good enough, though I have swapped to Ubuntu at times.
The way that I use my computer makes it so that the OS rarely matters anyway. I jsut use Linux because it doesn't annoy me, and Fedora works, so here I stay. There's no real reason past that.
No, IE became powerful because it shipped on Windows by default. For perhaps one release, most considered it better than the competition. However, competition meant little once IE was used by pretty much everyone because it was default. Microsoft made sure that most users never had a choice between more than one browser, and because of this, they more or less shoved IE into the face of most Windows users, making competition a thing of the past.
This EU ruling came about a decade too late, but that doesn't mean it's groundless.
Microsoft is a convicted monopolist. They have lots of power (90% of computers) that triggers a group of laws that limits what they can do.
Apple is under no legal obligation to sell or offer anything on their hardware, nor is any other hardware vendor. They are not powerful enough to trigger the laws Microsoft has triggered, and therefore do not have any limitations on what they can ship their computers with.
Microsoft is a convicted monopolist. They have lots of power (90% of computers) that triggers a group of laws that limits what they can do. Are you getting this in your brain?
Apple is under no legal obligation to sell anything on their hardware, nor is any other hardware vendor. They are not powerful enough to trigger the laws Microsoft has triggered, and therefore do not have any limitations on what they can ship their computers with.
Microsoft has been convicted of violating anti-trust laws. To force a browser down someone's throats for them is bad because they have 90% of the computing world at their fingertips.
THAT'S the difference between Apple and MS. Apple does not. They have, what 8%? That is not a monopoly. Therefore, it is an inane comparison to make. Microsoft is severly limited by what they can and can't do because they are so large and powerful, NOT because of the morals of the issue.
Just because you don't like Apple and their way of business doesn't mean you have to go around every story posting about how Apple should be procecuted for violating anti-trust laws too. They do not have a monopoly on computer hardware and therefore cannot violate these laws - they merely do not allow anyone but themselves (and chosen others) to sell their software and hardware. As for the iPod, that may be a different story, though the MP3 player market is so random and shifting that it's hard to punish anyone for what happened a year ago when it's already irrelivant.
Well said. Besides, look at the price of the consoles themselves. They're at the prices their predecessors launched at. If we've got another five years left for these three consoles, plus more prolific price cuts so that casual gamers don't feel like they're gabling money, then they will surely continue to sell like madmen.
Everyone I know - including me - is playing the PS2. A lot of my friends play the PS2 games on the BC PS3, because that's just what everyone else is doing. (Yeah, some play Xbox Live too - I'm not saying that's all they play.) That console was just too good, and in times like these, the used market is a gold mine.
He's not talking about reality, he's talking about MP3 Players. Considering he didn't say anything about regular everyday noise, I have no idea why you brought it up, or even considered lecturing him based on the complete lack of information you possess.
Slashdot Mirror
I know you're just cutting swathes into lesser beings for trolling's sake, but you do have a slight truth in the anti-intellectual angle. However, this comes from the segrigation that schools naturally impose on their students, not from a society imposed choice of moral or value system. Challenge or Honors classes are set aside and rarely "spill" into the rest of the pack for scheduling reasons. I can speak from personal experience and say that this creates an artificial but still very real barrier between those who chose to take a challenge and those who don't. There's certainly friction between the two. It's additionally compounded when you enter lower-level classes (for students who, for example, don't pass the basic skills test mandated by one of the governments).
That seems a bit red herring to me. Why isn't there a bigger interest in computers? Football, obviously.
I understand the use of your example, but here's the problem: Football is just entertainment. It's an out of school sport, and the teachers at my old high school (I graduated last year, if anyone was wondering) didn't let the players get any slack; any more for the kids who spent their night watching TV or running around the lake. This was certainly not the norm, but it was a breath of fresh air after middle school.
The reason why a lot of kids at my high school hated technology was that it hated them. Their only interaction with computers was a plethora of broken, buggy, useless Windows XP machines with a haphazard security system and more oddities and crashes than the machines of your nightmares. (Oh, and that was considered the "good" lab - the bad lab had old Mac OS 9 computers that could barely run Word.) Now throw some kids in a basic computers class and watch the frustration stream across their faces. No wonder they thought that those of us who knew how those bastards worked were magical wizards - in a sense, we were.
I actually booted up a LiveCD of Fedora once to keep myself sane. The admin at the time wouldn't let me back on the machines after than (until he retired).
Depending on where he is, that would be a public performance and would require royalties to be paid.
cutting-edge innovators compared to Lady Gaga or Alicia Keys.
Way to pick the lowest common denominator to prove your point.
I can never understand this. It wasn't that bad, and became the punchline of several very amusing jokes later in the review.
The old ones are easily $300 used, probably less. Getting the Linux-compatable units new is still possible, as well - they haven't purged the retail stores of all the fats just yet.
It's easy to forget what sin is in the middle of a battlefield.
During weeks 4 and 5 you also have a tail.
Are we blue and do we have really big eyes, too? Because then Cameron could pitch Avatar as an abortion metaphor.
Well, see mine already included yours, because "anything" is a blanket term that includes ignoring the problem. Not much of a fix if you ask me.
Try out Absolute Linux as a desktop for a little bit to get used to Slackware's differences. It's a good, lightweight system that's mostly Slackware.
Hey, Gordon, it's me, Barney, from Black Mesa!
Terrorism has never shown any sign of being deterred by anything.
Fixed that for you.
Windows 7 is a little better, and this is coming from a Linux user. So they are trying.
I use whatever works on my machine. Fedora is usually good enough, though I have swapped to Ubuntu at times.
The way that I use my computer makes it so that the OS rarely matters anyway. I jsut use Linux because it doesn't annoy me, and Fedora works, so here I stay. There's no real reason past that.
No, IE became powerful because it shipped on Windows by default. For perhaps one release, most considered it better than the competition. However, competition meant little once IE was used by pretty much everyone because it was default. Microsoft made sure that most users never had a choice between more than one browser, and because of this, they more or less shoved IE into the face of most Windows users, making competition a thing of the past.
This EU ruling came about a decade too late, but that doesn't mean it's groundless.
Microsoft is a convicted monopolist. They have lots of power (90% of computers) that triggers a group of laws that limits what they can do. Apple is under no legal obligation to sell or offer anything on their hardware, nor is any other hardware vendor. They are not powerful enough to trigger the laws Microsoft has triggered, and therefore do not have any limitations on what they can ship their computers with.
Microsoft is a convicted monopolist. They have lots of power (90% of computers) that triggers a group of laws that limits what they can do. Are you getting this in your brain?
Apple is under no legal obligation to sell anything on their hardware, nor is any other hardware vendor. They are not powerful enough to trigger the laws Microsoft has triggered, and therefore do not have any limitations on what they can ship their computers with.
Microsoft has been convicted of violating anti-trust laws. To force a browser down someone's throats for them is bad because they have 90% of the computing world at their fingertips.
THAT'S the difference between Apple and MS. Apple does not. They have, what 8%? That is not a monopoly. Therefore, it is an inane comparison to make. Microsoft is severly limited by what they can and can't do because they are so large and powerful, NOT because of the morals of the issue.
Just because you don't like Apple and their way of business doesn't mean you have to go around every story posting about how Apple should be procecuted for violating anti-trust laws too. They do not have a monopoly on computer hardware and therefore cannot violate these laws - they merely do not allow anyone but themselves (and chosen others) to sell their software and hardware. As for the iPod, that may be a different story, though the MP3 player market is so random and shifting that it's hard to punish anyone for what happened a year ago when it's already irrelivant.
Mod parent -1 Liar. If he had a girlfriend he'd know that it's utterly impossible to convince a member of the fairer sex to mow the lawn.
Well said. Besides, look at the price of the consoles themselves. They're at the prices their predecessors launched at. If we've got another five years left for these three consoles, plus more prolific price cuts so that casual gamers don't feel like they're gabling money, then they will surely continue to sell like madmen.
Everyone I know - including me - is playing the PS2. A lot of my friends play the PS2 games on the BC PS3, because that's just what everyone else is doing. (Yeah, some play Xbox Live too - I'm not saying that's all they play.) That console was just too good, and in times like these, the used market is a gold mine.
I'm proud to be an American.
I'm proud to live in that dot over here. My friend wishes he had been born on the dot on the other side of the map, though. If only.
[citation needed]
Apparently it's okay to be bigoted when the target is the US.
It gets awfully tiring to be reminded of just how fucking bigotted the US is in this way.
Apparently isn't not bigotry if you're the one doing it, right? Way to go.
It's a pity that "just pirate it" isn't a typical reposnce for most issues people have with content they consume, isn't it?
He's not talking about reality, he's talking about MP3 Players. Considering he didn't say anything about regular everyday noise, I have no idea why you brought it up, or even considered lecturing him based on the complete lack of information you possess.