>>>I had AT&T Broadband, and when Comcast bought them out,
How is it legal for a single company to own BOTH the internet companies in your neighborhood (cable and dsl)? Sounds like a reason to file an antitrust lawsuit.
AOL-TW was a victim of bad timing, merging just prior to an economic meltdown (dot-com crash). Comcast-NBC will be merging while the economy is on the rise.
A friend was just telling me about a little organization called ACORN that was using taxpayer dollars to support prostitutes (or something). It's strange that I never saw that on the Comcast News Network or ComcastNBC. He said he saw it on something called Air America - never even heard of them. By the way, what's "acorn"? (shrug)
Back to topic -
Just as government has introduced the idea of choice for electric providers and phone company providers, they need to do the same with Comcast cable lines. Customers can get a list of individual channels (or packages), and they decide what they desire to see.
I wonder how Coke would taste without the sweeteners? I am sick-and-tired of buying products with sugar or corn syrup added. And if you buy the "no sugar added" version, they often use sugar alcohols which are no healthier than plain-old sugar.
Legislators like region-locking because it allows them to censor material.
For example North America (u.s.) could demand removal of nudity from a game (to protect the children of course). Without region-locking this law would have no power because people could just import the uncensored version from Japan or Europe. With region-locking the legislators' power trip stands, because you can't play any version except the NA-censored version. This is why you'll never see region locking made illegal.
HOW TO FIX YOUR BRICKED WII AT MINIMAL COST (please note this only works if your wii is like-new in appearance)
(1) Visit the site of the people responsible for bricking your wii - nintendo.com (2) Buy a wii using credit card (3) Get wii via mail and verify it's working properly (4) Tell them you wii is not working and will be returning for a refund; take your old wii that this megacorp bricked, and mail it back with tracking. (5) Wait. (6) If after one month you still haven't got a refund, file a credit card dispute on the sale. Provide tracking number as proof-of-return. They will reverse the charge.
Congratulations!
A megacorporation's attempt to screw a citizen (by turning his/her console into a paperweight) has been cock-blocked.
The people sit at the top level of authority, and that power flows downward to the state government, then the continental government. By revolting the people are merely taking-back the powers/rights that were illegally stolen from them by the lower levels.
P.S. ABC didn't copy Harlan's idea. They copied the whole freaking script with changes to try to hide the fact (like a plagiarist schoolboy copying somebody else's report). That's why Harlan won his case.
And I don't agree with you that software shouldn't be patented. If Edison was able to patent the phonograph, describing how to store and then retrieve music, then there's no reason why he shouldn't be able to patent a music codec too, which is also used to stor/retrive music.
First, I admit I don't like anonymous cowards. The reason is because they are the ones most likely to attack me or other posters with insults. I think if you're going to attack someone, you should do it under your real handle and face the karmic consequences (like being modded troll or flame).
Back to topic:
- Paramount had a bunch of material about Babylon 5. - They also had a rival network to face (PTEN) that could endanger their own UPN - And they had to protect their Star Trek monopoly (yes it was a monopoly at that point) from competition.
Paramount had the opportunity to kill both an upstart show and PTEN before it was even born, and thereby solidify its own UPN as the 5th network. There were literally billions of dollars at stake. If you think Paramount just said, "Oh we're not going to look or read these B5 scripts we have laying in this drawer," then you're naive and don't truly understand human nature.
>>>DS9 didn't kill Babylon 5.
It almost did. Straczynski said the most common reason why B5 was rejected by other studios was, "We don't want to go up against Deep Space Nine. There's not enough room for two space station shows, plus Next Generation too. Sorry." Even WB's PTEN management didn't greenlight the show immediately. They made a movie first, checked the ratings, and almost canceled B5 for fear that DS9 would crush them. The only reason B5 Season 1 happened was because it operated on only half the budget of DS9, and therefore looked like a bargain.
Also:
This isn't proof just personal observation. I watched DS9 and B5 side-by-side for 7 years. The similarities were obvious, and the rac.arts.startrek groups were filled with accusations that B5 was just a copy of DS9 (for all the reasons I listed about similar characters, shapeshifters, et cetera). Even after both shows were on for awhile and they diverged, there was still blatant copying. B5 announced a major war between two key races, and then DS9 also had a war between two major races. A story would appear on B5 (civil war on earth), and suddenly DS9 would copy the exact-same story. At one point DS9 actually bribed a recurring B5 actor (General Hague) to quit B5 and come work for DS9 instead, which left B5 with no actor to fill that role.
Yeah Paramount fights fair (rolls eyes). When you watch these episodes in sync with one another, it becomes clear who was copying whom. And you're right that B5 was a superior show. That's why the inferior show copied it.;-) I'm just joking. I actually think both shows are equal - B5 had a better overall story, but its standalone episodes stunk. DS9 did better standalone stories.
If by "puppetmaster" you mean corporation, and that all evils come from the corporation(s), then how do you explain what happened under the democratic Roman republic? They had no corporations of any kind, and yet still the government jailed, killed, and sucked money from the wallets of its citizens.
By your own theory, that should not have happened. Without the corporations, the Roman citizens should have been living in a paradise where they elected their own officials, and never need fear their government. So it's clear to me the evil IS the government - always has been and always will be.
>>>(thanks to mandatory-binding-arbitration clauses in non-negotiable contracts; read Consumerist sometime)
These contracts have no validity in a court of law. Judges have ruled again-and-again-and-again that such a contract does not take-away a citizen's right to a hearing in front of judge, who will reach his own conclusion.
And as I pointed-out elsewhere, even before corporations existed (pre-1800) governments were jailing humans indefinitely, or taking their money, or sending them off to die in warfare. So even if we had a utopia with absolutely No corporations, government would still remain and still be trampling over its citizens because that's what governments do, and have done, for the last 3000+ years.
>>>corporation cannot even in principle be restrained by the popular will.
False. The popular will CAN restrain the popular will by voting. Yes, voting. I get to vote every time I buy or don't buy the product. And if I get enough people to boycott the product I have the power to bankrupt the corporation. Example: Circuit City.
Stop living in some candyland belief that government is good. History going all the way back to the Democratic Roman Republic shows that it simply isn't true. There were no corporations back then, and yet the government still jailed, taxed, and drafted/executed citizens.
>>>>>Yes because a corporation is still just a corporation. They have a lot of power to make your life unhappy, but they still don't have the power to suck $$$ from your wallet
>>all they have to do is sue you
Sue me for what? Because I decided I didn't want to buy Comcast cable? That Comcast v. C64love case would be thrown out the very first hour. So we're back to what I originally said - a corporation like Comcast can not simply suck dollars out of my wallet like government can (which collects about $25,000 a year from my wallet).
As for your other examples, those only solidify my point about why government is a greater fear than a corporation. If government did not exist, the corporation would have no Congress or Judges to bribe.
And finally even before corporations existed (i.e. pre-1800), governments killed or imprisoned millions of humans. So the root evil, around which everything else revolves, is the government itself
>>>There's no absolute right to make threats like that.
I wonder why it is that no one listens? First off I did NOT say it was an absolute right, which is why I mentioned the gun and imminent threat qualification. You did not need to correct me since I was not under any delusion that death threats were absolutely protected. Second if I say, "The U.S. Supreme Court declared death threats as protected speech," that's pretty much the end of discussion. And yet here you are being a tool, and claiming that death threats are illegal, in complete contradiction of the Supreme Court ruling.
(shaking head) Unbelievable. Do you think the Supreme Court rulings have no meaning???
Alright. Since you're too lazy to do the research yourself, I'll do it for you. In Watts v. United States, 394 U.S. 705, 22 L.Ed. 2d 664 (1969) the communication made by Watts was a very specific threat, made in the context of his announced refusal to report for his draft physical: "If they ever make me carry a rifle, the first man I want to get in my sights is LBJ". Watt's statement was held to be "political hyperbole" and not a true threat. The Court noted: "The language of the political arena... is often vituperative, abusive and inexact. [The petitioner's]... only offense here was "a kind of very crude offensive method of stating a political opposition to the President." and "Fear of serious injury cannot alone justify suppression of free speech... To justify suppression of free speech there must be reasonable ground to fear that serious evil will result if free speech is practiced. There must be reasonable grounds to believe that the danger is imminent."
In Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444, 22 L.Ed. 2d 664 (1969) this was further solidified, when the court formulated the following "incitement" test with respect to speech which advocates unlawful conduct: "These later decisions have fashioned the principal that the constitutional guarantees of free speech and free press do not permit a State to forbid or proscribe advocacy of the use of force or of law violation except where such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action."
And in United States v. Alkhabaz, (2) 104 F.3d 1492 (6th Cir. 1997): "Although it may offend our sensibilities, a communication objectively indicating a serious expression of an intention to inflict bodily harm cannot constitute a threat unless the communication also is conveyed for the purpose of furthering some goal thorough the use of intimidation."
Ownership of self and one's possessions (i.e. stuff you acquired through your body's labor) is NOT transferable. Those rights are eternal. Even if I sell my possessions, I haven't given up my right to ownership - I've merely converted it from one form of wealth to another.
>>>If you were to sign a contract "I give up my right so sell this product second hand in return for a lower purchase price" for example,
Why the hell would I want to do that? I would no more do that than I would sell myself into perpetual slavery.
Property is what you get when you use your body (which you naturally own), mix your body's labor with a material good, and therefore can claim it as your own. For example if I take mud, and mold it into several dozen bowls, than those bowls become my property because my body's labor has been mixed with it.
I can then trade those bowls to acquire an alternate form of wealth, like my neighbor's hand-built chairs..... or maybe money.
I could go on and on and on with vide-after-video, but instead I'll share my own personal story: I was on a VACATION doing a crosscountry trip from California to D.C. when I got stopped in Texas. I was nowhere near a border but for some reason the border patrol stopped me and demanded to see inside my trunk. I asked for a warrant and they said they had none. They asked me to step out of my car, and made me stand for an HOUR in the cold night air while they kept demanding to see inside my trunk. They did a visual search of my driver seat, passenger seat, and rear seat, but kept insisting they want to see inside my trunk. Finally they said, "You're not going to let us see your trunk?" And I said "not without a warrant... no." They then ordered me to get in the car and drive off.
What. The. Hell. Are we no longer allowed to enjoy a simple vacation without getting harassed by the Yakuza...oops I mean the Gestapo... oops I mean the U.S Feds??? --
I used to study for exams inside JCPenney's truck-loading dock bathroom. I had a test tomorrow, but I couldn't leave my job, and so that seemed a natural place to hide and review my notes for 1 or 2 hours without getting caught. Quiet too since the dock was rarely used at night.
>>>it's cultural. The USA is never going to excel at math, because it simply isn't rewarded, whereas sports achievement is.
Well put. I don't understand why our government-run schools spend *billions* of dollars on sports. Is it important to get some exercise? Yes but a simple visit to the gym class once a day will achieve that goal just fine. You don't need a formal sports regime. Besides how much do kids *really* benefit? At my reunion I see the old High School football and track stars are now fat round balls! They apparently learned nothing from their sports efforts.
Invest the money where it makes sense for long-term gain - in science and math and history - which is knowledge that can be used from age 20 to 100. Also maybe some consumer education so they don't get ripped-off by dishonest practices.
Back to article -
I always find it amusing that in my 4 years of college, a total of about 150 days per year, I learned FAR more than my 4 year*180 days worth of high school. What's the difference? The focus is on the learning, whereas high school is more like a daycare center.
I called my representative and told him to ban cellphone use inside moving vehicles. I also said we need to ban use of other electronic devices like shavers and computers and TVs while driving. That's all that really needs to be done.
Judas Priest! - When I was a young adult we had no phones in our cars, and therefore didn't get any messages until we got home, and we still survived. You can survive today as well. Or at the very least you should pull-off the road before taking a call.
Slashdot Mirror
>>>I had AT&T Broadband, and when Comcast bought them out,
How is it legal for a single company to own BOTH the internet companies in your neighborhood (cable and dsl)? Sounds like a reason to file an antitrust lawsuit.
AOL-TW was a victim of bad timing, merging just prior to an economic meltdown (dot-com crash). Comcast-NBC will be merging while the economy is on the rise.
>>>(or, more importantly, DON'T see and hear).
A friend was just telling me about a little organization called ACORN that was using taxpayer dollars to support prostitutes (or something). It's strange that I never saw that on the Comcast News Network or ComcastNBC. He said he saw it on something called Air America - never even heard of them. By the way, what's "acorn"? (shrug)
Back to topic -
Just as government has introduced the idea of choice for electric providers and phone company providers, they need to do the same with Comcast cable lines. Customers can get a list of individual channels (or packages), and they decide what they desire to see.
Oh sugar!
I wonder how Coke would taste without the sweeteners? I am sick-and-tired of buying products with sugar or corn syrup added. And if you buy the "no sugar added" version, they often use sugar alcohols which are no healthier than plain-old sugar.
Legislators like region-locking because it allows them to censor material.
For example North America (u.s.) could demand removal of nudity from a game (to protect the children of course). Without region-locking this law would have no power because people could just import the uncensored version from Japan or Europe. With region-locking the legislators' power trip stands, because you can't play any version except the NA-censored version. This is why you'll never see region locking made illegal.
HOW TO FIX YOUR BRICKED WII AT MINIMAL COST
(please note this only works if your wii is like-new in appearance)
(1) Visit the site of the people responsible for bricking your wii - nintendo.com
(2) Buy a wii using credit card
(3) Get wii via mail and verify it's working properly
(4) Tell them you wii is not working and will be returning for a refund; take your old wii that this megacorp bricked, and mail it back with tracking.
(5) Wait.
(6) If after one month you still haven't got a refund, file a credit card dispute on the sale. Provide tracking number as proof-of-return. They will reverse the charge.
Congratulations!
A megacorporation's attempt to screw a citizen (by turning his/her console into a paperweight) has been cock-blocked.
You mean from the top.
The people sit at the top level of authority, and that power flows downward to the state government, then the continental government. By revolting the people are merely taking-back the powers/rights that were illegally stolen from them by the lower levels.
.....the content, the distribution channel, and the local government-granted monopoly over neighborhoods, then they control the minds of the people.
P.S.
And if I ever get tired of DDR, I can always sell it on ebay and recover most of my $20. Good luck trying to recover your $840 worth of online gaming.
>>>It is immoral and unethical to leave a fool with any money.
Hey Barak, is dat u?
P.S. ABC didn't copy Harlan's idea. They copied the whole freaking script with changes to try to hide the fact (like a plagiarist schoolboy copying somebody else's report). That's why Harlan won his case.
And I don't agree with you that software shouldn't be patented. If Edison was able to patent the phonograph, describing how to store and then retrieve music, then there's no reason why he shouldn't be able to patent a music codec too, which is also used to stor/retrive music.
First, I admit I don't like anonymous cowards. The reason is because they are the ones most likely to attack me or other posters with insults. I think if you're going to attack someone, you should do it under your real handle and face the karmic consequences (like being modded troll or flame).
Back to topic:
- Paramount had a bunch of material about Babylon 5.
- They also had a rival network to face (PTEN) that could endanger their own UPN
- And they had to protect their Star Trek monopoly (yes it was a monopoly at that point) from competition.
Paramount had the opportunity to kill both an upstart show and PTEN before it was even born, and thereby solidify its own UPN as the 5th network. There were literally billions of dollars at stake. If you think Paramount just said, "Oh we're not going to look or read these B5 scripts we have laying in this drawer," then you're naive and don't truly understand human nature.
>>>DS9 didn't kill Babylon 5.
It almost did. Straczynski said the most common reason why B5 was rejected by other studios was, "We don't want to go up against Deep Space Nine. There's not enough room for two space station shows, plus Next Generation too. Sorry." Even WB's PTEN management didn't greenlight the show immediately. They made a movie first, checked the ratings, and almost canceled B5 for fear that DS9 would crush them. The only reason B5 Season 1 happened was because it operated on only half the budget of DS9, and therefore looked like a bargain.
Also:
This isn't proof just personal observation. I watched DS9 and B5 side-by-side for 7 years. The similarities were obvious, and the rac.arts.startrek groups were filled with accusations that B5 was just a copy of DS9 (for all the reasons I listed about similar characters, shapeshifters, et cetera). Even after both shows were on for awhile and they diverged, there was still blatant copying. B5 announced a major war between two key races, and then DS9 also had a war between two major races. A story would appear on B5 (civil war on earth), and suddenly DS9 would copy the exact-same story. At one point DS9 actually bribed a recurring B5 actor (General Hague) to quit B5 and come work for DS9 instead, which left B5 with no actor to fill that role.
Yeah Paramount fights fair (rolls eyes). When you watch these episodes in sync with one another, it becomes clear who was copying whom. And you're right that B5 was a superior show. That's why the inferior show copied it. ;-) I'm just joking. I actually think both shows are equal - B5 had a better overall story, but its standalone episodes stunk. DS9 did better standalone stories.
Or they could just refund the money spent on the original listing.
>>>The puppet does not control the puppetmaster
If by "puppetmaster" you mean corporation, and that all evils come from the corporation(s), then how do you explain what happened under the democratic Roman republic? They had no corporations of any kind, and yet still the government jailed, killed, and sucked money from the wallets of its citizens.
By your own theory, that should not have happened. Without the corporations, the Roman citizens should have been living in a paradise where they elected their own officials, and never need fear their government. So it's clear to me the evil IS the government - always has been and always will be.
>>>(thanks to mandatory-binding-arbitration clauses in non-negotiable contracts; read Consumerist sometime)
These contracts have no validity in a court of law. Judges have ruled again-and-again-and-again that such a contract does not take-away a citizen's right to a hearing in front of judge, who will reach his own conclusion.
And as I pointed-out elsewhere, even before corporations existed (pre-1800) governments were jailing humans indefinitely, or taking their money, or sending them off to die in warfare. So even if we had a utopia with absolutely No corporations, government would still remain and still be trampling over its citizens because that's what governments do, and have done, for the last 3000+ years.
>>>corporation cannot even in principle be restrained by the popular will.
False. The popular will CAN restrain the popular will by voting. Yes, voting. I get to vote every time I buy or don't buy the product. And if I get enough people to boycott the product I have the power to bankrupt the corporation. Example: Circuit City.
Stop living in some candyland belief that government is good. History going all the way back to the Democratic Roman Republic shows that it simply isn't true. There were no corporations back then, and yet the government still jailed, taxed, and drafted/executed citizens.
>>>>>Yes because a corporation is still just a corporation. They have a lot of power to make your life unhappy, but they still don't have the power to suck $$$ from your wallet
>>all they have to do is sue you
Sue me for what? Because I decided I didn't want to buy Comcast cable? That Comcast v. C64love case would be thrown out the very first hour. So we're back to what I originally said - a corporation like Comcast can not simply suck dollars out of my wallet like government can (which collects about $25,000 a year from my wallet).
As for your other examples, those only solidify my point about why government is a greater fear than a corporation.
If government did not exist, the corporation would have no Congress or Judges to bribe.
And finally even before corporations existed (i.e. pre-1800), governments killed or imprisoned
millions of humans. So the root evil, around which everything else revolves, is the government itself
>>>There's no absolute right to make threats like that.
I wonder why it is that no one listens? First off I did NOT say it was an absolute right, which is why I mentioned the gun and imminent threat qualification. You did not need to correct me since I was not under any delusion that death threats were absolutely protected. Second if I say, "The U.S. Supreme Court declared death threats as protected speech," that's pretty much the end of discussion. And yet here you are being a tool, and claiming that death threats are illegal, in complete contradiction of the Supreme Court ruling.
(shaking head) Unbelievable. Do you think the Supreme Court rulings have no meaning???
Alright. Since you're too lazy to do the research yourself, I'll do it for you. In Watts v. United States, 394 U.S. 705, 22 L.Ed. 2d 664 (1969) the communication made by Watts was a very specific threat, made in the context of his announced refusal to report for his draft physical: "If they ever make me carry a rifle, the first man I want to get in my sights is LBJ". Watt's statement was held to be "political hyperbole" and not a true threat. The Court noted: "The language of the political arena ... is often vituperative, abusive and inexact. [The petitioner's] ... only offense here was "a kind of very crude offensive method of stating a political opposition to the President." and "Fear of serious injury cannot alone justify suppression of free speech... To justify suppression of free speech there must be reasonable ground to fear that serious evil will result if free speech is practiced. There must be reasonable grounds to believe that the danger is imminent."
In Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444, 22 L.Ed. 2d 664 (1969) this was further solidified, when the court formulated the following "incitement" test with respect to speech which advocates unlawful conduct: "These later decisions have fashioned the principal that the constitutional guarantees of free speech and free press do not permit a State to forbid or proscribe advocacy of the use of force or of law violation except where such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action."
And in United States v. Alkhabaz, (2) 104 F.3d 1492 (6th Cir. 1997): "Although it may offend our sensibilities, a communication objectively indicating a serious expression of an intention to inflict bodily harm cannot constitute a threat unless the communication also is conveyed for the purpose of furthering some goal thorough the use of intimidation."
Ownership of self and one's possessions (i.e. stuff you acquired through your body's labor) is NOT transferable. Those rights are eternal. Even if I sell my possessions, I haven't given up my right to ownership - I've merely converted it from one form of wealth to another.
>>>If you were to sign a contract "I give up my right so sell this product second hand in return for a lower purchase price" for example,
Why the hell would I want to do that? I would no more do that than I would sell myself into perpetual slavery.
Property is what you get when you use your body (which you naturally own), mix your body's labor with a material good, and therefore can claim it as your own. For example if I take mud, and mold it into several dozen bowls, than those bowls become my property because my body's labor has been mixed with it.
I can then trade those bowls to acquire an alternate form of wealth, like my neighbor's hand-built chairs..... or maybe money.
>>>>That would severely restrict investigations by the police.
Good! The group called "the police" are FAR scarier than any imaginary terrorist. Just check out these videos for yourself:
- unlawful search of innocent driver http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2ZV_kQh048 [youtube.com]
- unlawful arrest of Professor Gates http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n15KsSLQhBg [youtube.com]
- beating of an innocent pastor by police. His story http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUzd7G875Hc [youtube.com]
- Actual video of beating http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jgejD6c-9YA [youtube.com]
- unknown person getting beaten http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZrVbWYyfOMI [youtube.com]
- guy has already surrendered, but the cps start kicking him in the head http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vd5yrq2QB-g [youtube.com]
I could go on and on and on with vide-after-video, but instead I'll share my own personal story: I was on a VACATION doing a crosscountry trip from California to D.C. when I got stopped in Texas. I was nowhere near a border but for some reason the border patrol stopped me and demanded to see inside my trunk. I asked for a warrant and they said they had none. They asked me to step out of my car, and made me stand for an HOUR in the cold night air while they kept demanding to see inside my trunk. They did a visual search of my driver seat, passenger seat, and rear seat, but kept insisting they want to see inside my trunk. Finally they said, "You're not going to let us see your trunk?" And I said "not without a warrant... no." They then ordered me to get in the car and drive off.
What. The. Hell. Are we no longer allowed to enjoy a simple vacation without getting harassed by the Yakuza...oops I mean the Gestapo... oops I mean the U.S Feds???
--
>>>To map all the strip joints and beer pubs.
And also the path to the girls' dorm's shower room. (Think Revenge of the Nerds or Porkys.)
I used to study for exams inside JCPenney's truck-loading dock bathroom. I had a test tomorrow, but I couldn't leave my job, and so that seemed a natural place to hide and review my notes for 1 or 2 hours without getting caught. Quiet too since the dock was rarely used at night.
Ahhh the good old days.
>>>it's cultural. The USA is never going to excel at math, because it simply isn't rewarded, whereas sports achievement is.
Well put. I don't understand why our government-run schools spend *billions* of dollars on sports. Is it important to get some exercise? Yes but a simple visit to the gym class once a day will achieve that goal just fine. You don't need a formal sports regime. Besides how much do kids *really* benefit? At my reunion I see the old High School football and track stars are now fat round balls! They apparently learned nothing from their sports efforts.
Invest the money where it makes sense for long-term gain - in science and math and history - which is knowledge that can be used from age 20 to 100. Also maybe some consumer education so they don't get ripped-off by dishonest practices.
Back to article -
I always find it amusing that in my 4 years of college, a total of about 150 days per year, I learned FAR more than my 4 year*180 days worth of high school. What's the difference? The focus is on the learning, whereas high school is more like a daycare center.
>>>What have you done.
I called my representative and told him to ban cellphone use inside moving vehicles. I also said we need to ban use of other electronic devices like shavers and computers and TVs while driving. That's all that really needs to be done.
Judas Priest! - When I was a young adult we had no phones in our cars, and therefore didn't get any messages until we got home, and we still survived. You can survive today as well. Or at the very least you should pull-off the road before taking a call.
Yep. That's what Oracle salespeople will be saying for the next year.