>>> the jail braking doesn't really enable pirated stuff to play, just non-approved stuff.
According to the U.S. Digital Millenium Copyright Act, it doesn't matter. The mere *act* of jailbreaking a product is illegal, even if your goal is just to run the freeware EDIT on your iPhone or PS3 or whatever.
At least Steve Jobs is merely a person, and not a member of Congress. He can't *force* me to buy his products, like a Congressman can force me to buy health insurance I don't want. In fact the only iPod in my house is one that I stole.
That's what that whole Professor Gates thing was about. He believed he owned his house and had a right not to let others enter his property. But he was wrong, because the U.S. government merely "leases" your property and can control how you use your home, just the same way Apple controls your iPhone or Sony your PS3. The police entering the home and handcuffing the resident made that clear - property ownership is an old-fashioned and dead idea./end Devil's Advocate mode
...just as they arrested that guy who was illegally modifying PS3s without Sony's permission. We cannot allow people to have control over their own property.
>>>any issue involving [government] is automatically the [politicians] fault. Why RTFA when [government] is to blame for [almost] everything that is wrong with the world. >>>
>>>The meat of your point is that apple charges for updates and its bad, and microsoft charges for updates but its good because you choose not to upgrade. >>>
This comment displays your own ignorance, because Apple charges me around $100 each year to upgrade my G4 Mac from 10.3 to 10.4 to 10.5, whereas Microsoft charged me *nothing* to upgrade from XP to XP-SP1 to SP2 to SP3. Which is why I said: "I bought Windows XP in 2002 and haven't need to spend a dime on OS upgrades since then." Please learn to read, and more importantly comprehend what you read, before you comment.
>>>You don't have to pay for 10.4 or 10.5 or 10.6 as upgrades to your 10.3
Yes you do. I already inquired and Apple expects me to give them money in order to get these upgrades, and since I don't have that money I kept my G3 Mac at 10.3. (And unfortunately 10.3 won't run the latest Safari or Firefox software.)
>>>So you saw the logo inside the glove box without having to open it?
Wow you have more air in your head that a typical highschool cheerleader. I stated my friend allowed me to "check out" his new car, which would include opening the glovebox and other compartments. Duh. What a maroon.
>>>Now compare a macbook pro to a pc running vista, same applies. Apple has put a LOT more thought into the overall package >>>
Yes true. Until I have to shell-out $100 to upgrade from 10.5 to 10.6, whereas with the Intel PC I'm still running the exact-same XP install I had in 2002, and the --- to SP1 to SP2 to SP3 upgrades were free of charge. Simply put: I don't feel like paying that annual tribute to Apple for upgrades. I'm not that wealthy. It's why I drive a tiny Honda that gets 70mpg rather than an expensive Acura that guzzles gasoline.
>>>OSX has artificial, arguably anticompetitive restrictions on what hardware it will run on, which is why it takes more than just coming up with equivalent hardware to run it on a non-Apple computer. >>>
False.
You can run OS X on other, cheaper Intel machines from Dell or Gateway or whoever. All you need it the necessary hacking program which I believe is called "LeonardAssist" to turn your $500 PC clone into something as powerful as the overpriced $1000 Mac variant. So yes the Honda v. Acura was an appropriate analogy.
That's good! If Bing was the CNN or MSNBC of search engines, then virtually every search would lead to the National Socialists website. The CNN/NBC reporters love their "Big Daddy" government, and their stories are all biased to the assumption we need more government.
That's a common claim, but it's proven false by places like England that used to have commercial-free television (BBC). Were British goods any cheaper to buy than American goods? Nope. In fact lack-of-advertising drives costs up, as fewer goods are sold and the cost to produce each item increases (reverse economoy of scale), so British goods used to cost more than U.S. goods.
Plus, the advertised goods have to compete against non-advertised goods (store brands), so even if prices did start to rise on the frequently-advertised Pepsi for example, you could just buy RC Cola instead, which has no advertising dollars in the pricetag.
One final thought:
Being the cheapass that I am, not only don't buy I television or radio programs, I also buy very little of anything else. So I'm making-out very well with the "free" model versus the "pay" model of broadcasting.
Ya know it helps if you actually read the articles you link. QUOTE:
"Increases in inequality lead to more growth," the paper's authors wrote. "There appears to be some trickle-down effect in the long run." i.e. The $1/hour increase for engineers/managers that I discussed in my great-great-grandparent post.
>>>The Daily Mail is attacking ID cards because it hates, hates, hates the current UK government. Think of them Fox News in newspaper form. >>>
Oh good. I thought you were going to say they are like CNN or MSNBC - leftist "we need government to run people's lives from conception to death" propaganda machines. If DM is like Fox then that's not good, but it's also not that bad.
At least they're not like CBN (Christian Broadcast Network).
I used those CDs to get about three years of free access in the late 90s. "Why yes my name is Harry Balzac. I'm calling to get my three months of free access. No, no, I've never used your service before - I swear."
Later one particularly good AOL deal allowed me to get a $300 computer for "free" from Best Buy in 2001, if I signed-up for an AOL account. All I needed to do was pay the sales tax ($15).
Bah humbug. I was geek before most of ye were even born. I was using AOL before most people even heard of the internet. It started circa 1985 with Quantum Link - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_Link - a primitive version of the graphical web for Commodore users. It also gave me access to Global usenet forums like rec.arts.startrek wher you can still find my messages from the 1980s.
Then it evolved into AOL which provided early text-only Gopher and Web browser access to my Commodore Amiga. Even today I'm still using their "Netscape Web Accelerator" for dialup access, which is simply AOL by a different name. I'm amazed this company has managed to last for so long.
>>>People (i.e., "the talent") are a resource to be acquired, used up and disposed of as cheaply and as profitably as possible. >>>
That's okay because the company's bank account is just a resource for me to suck as much money as possible, for the least work as possible, before my one-year contract expires. (Also the free pens and paper and staplers are a nice, undocumented benefit too.)
It just suddenly dawned on me that I've been a customer of AOL for nearly 25 years! I joined when it was known as Quantum Link - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_Link - a primitive version of the graphical web for Commodore users. Then it evolved into AOL which provided early text-only internet access.
Even today I'm still using their "Netscape Web Accelerator" for dialup access, which is simply AOL by a different name. I'm amazed this company has managed to last for so long.
Freedom also includes the right to keep your personal information AWAY from the government, without having to fear you'll get arrested when you say "no" if some cop demands your ID, or your medical information, or your social security number.
>>>Is there a country in the World that has an ID card system that can't be forged/cloned???
The old fashioned ink-on-paper method with a few holograms added is very effective. There's no way for someone to read that ID as long as you keep it on your wallet, out of view. In contrast the RFIDs are literally broadcasting your information to anyone within ~10 feet distance, which is an extremely-stupid design.
The Parliamentarian mandate for RFIDs is similar to the stupidity that gave us a bunch of computer-controlled voting booths (which are easily hacked, or prone to errors). The politicians don't understand technology. To them it's just "magic" that will cure everything, therefore they mandate this stuff without putting any thought into it, basing their decision upon faith rather than reason. They don't realize this "magic" has serious flaws that makes it less-desirable than the old paper-based methods.
>>>The BBC wouldn't want to put the Government on the spot.
Well of course not. He who holds the money controls the media. The BBC is no more going to criticize the government's ideas, than would PBS criticize the Congress. Last night while watching PBS I was amused that the PBS coverage about "Cash for Clunkers" was nothing but positive, as if it was the greatest thing the government ever did. They never mentioned the negative aspects (landfills full of cars rather than recycled, the broken-window fallacy, perfectly-good almost-new cars being destroyed, and increasing national debt load), or the Senate's desire to kill the program rather than approve more money.
According to PBS the program was a big shiny happy joyous celebration of goodness. Yay! I can easily imagine the BBC "reporting" is similar. Or as you said, "The BBC wouldn't want to put the Government on the spot."
You are not obligated to show a U.S. policeman your ID or any other papers unless (a) you're behind the wheel of a car (b) they have a warrant issued by a judge or (c) they saw you doing something illegal (probable cause).
This is what the cop did wrong in the case of the black professor: - He should have never crossed the threshold of the house - He had no right to demand ID of an owner standing inside the house
The proper course was for the officer to obtain a warrant from a judge, which then would have enabled him to get an ID or enter the home. Of course no judge would have issued that warrant because an anonymous phonecall is not probable cause, according to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The black professor had every right to be angry, and I would have acted in a similar fashion (and I'm a white guy). It's called the right of free speech. In your own home, you can stand there all day long calling cops shitheads and other curse words, and the cops have no authority to arrest you. That right is protected by the Supreme Law of the land.
President Obama, rather than invite the cop for a sitdown, should have stated accurately that the cop violated constitutional law.
An example of the PBS bias happened during their report on "Cash for Clunkers". Accoerding to PBS this is a fantastic program that everybody loves, and they even showed images of "shiny happy people" at the dealer to reinforced the positive message.
Never once did they mention the flaws of the program, like minivans and SUVs that look brand-new getting filled with "clunker killer" fluid and tossed into landfills. i.e. Wasteful destruction rather than recycling. Nor was it mentioned that the Senate is probably going to put a stop to the program by not adding more funds. Nor was it mentioned you can trade-in a 17mpg pickup and get a 19mpg gas-guzzling SUV, or that we're driving people into debt to buy new cars when they should be saving money to survive these hard times.
PBS' article only mentioned positive aspects, showing their clear bias in favor of big government programs, even the flawed ones. (And no this isn't the only time. PBS is biased throughout their news show.)
>>>to claim it doesn't matter is rather short-sighted
Actually if you read the CONTEXT of my post relative to other posts - what I said is that I don't need a newspaper. If there's a rampant serial killer running-around, which obviously would concern me, I'll still hear about it on the television or radio.
>>>Upon reading your sig I'm going to cut this short because you don't appear to be concerned at all with facts.
I hate prejudiced people. You shouldn't pre-judge somebody with stereotypes.
In most cases you jump to false conclusions, and make poor ass-umptions. Rather than label someone as part of a group like "black" or "asian" or whatever, you are much wiser to assume you know nothing about a person, and then gradually get to know him/her as an individual. For example would it surprise you to know I favor medical marijuana and homosexual or multi-partner marriages?
Slashdot Mirror
>>> the jail braking doesn't really enable pirated stuff to play, just non-approved stuff.
According to the U.S. Digital Millenium Copyright Act, it doesn't matter. The mere *act* of jailbreaking a product is illegal, even if your goal is just to run the freeware EDIT on your iPhone or PS3 or whatever.
Although you can't really blame Apple for denying Google Voice and similar apps
You can't really blame Comcast for denying access to hulu.com or tnt.com or scifi.com.....
Just something to think about - the motives for these denials are clear.
At least Steve Jobs is merely a person, and not a member of Congress. He can't *force* me to buy his products, like a Congressman can force me to buy health insurance I don't want. In fact the only iPod in my house is one that I stole.
Uh oh.
I shouldna told you that.
P.S.
That's what that whole Professor Gates thing was about. He believed he owned his house and had a right not to let others enter his property. But he was wrong, because the U.S. government merely "leases" your property and can control how you use your home, just the same way Apple controls your iPhone or Sony your PS3. The police entering the home and handcuffing the resident made that clear - property ownership is an old-fashioned and dead idea. /end Devil's Advocate mode
...just as they arrested that guy who was illegally modifying PS3s without Sony's permission. We cannot allow people to have control over their own property.
>>>any issue involving [government] is automatically the [politicians] fault. Why RTFA when [government] is to blame for [almost] everything that is wrong with the world.
>>>
Now your statement is accurate.
>>>The meat of your point is that apple charges for updates and its bad, and microsoft charges for updates but its good because you choose not to upgrade.
>>>
This comment displays your own ignorance, because Apple charges me around $100 each year to upgrade my G4 Mac from 10.3 to 10.4 to 10.5, whereas Microsoft charged me *nothing* to upgrade from XP to XP-SP1 to SP2 to SP3. Which is why I said: "I bought Windows XP in 2002 and haven't need to spend a dime on OS upgrades since then." Please learn to read, and more importantly comprehend what you read, before you comment.
>>>You don't have to pay for 10.4 or 10.5 or 10.6 as upgrades to your 10.3
Yes you do. I already inquired and Apple expects me to give them money in order to get these upgrades, and since I don't have that money I kept my G3 Mac at 10.3. (And unfortunately 10.3 won't run the latest Safari or Firefox software.)
>>>So you saw the logo inside the glove box without having to open it?
Wow you have more air in your head that a typical highschool cheerleader. I stated my friend allowed me to "check out" his new car, which would include opening the glovebox and other compartments. Duh. What a maroon.
>>>Now compare a macbook pro to a pc running vista, same applies. Apple has put a LOT more thought into the overall package
>>>
Yes true. Until I have to shell-out $100 to upgrade from 10.5 to 10.6, whereas with the Intel PC I'm still running the exact-same XP install I had in 2002, and the --- to SP1 to SP2 to SP3 upgrades were free of charge. Simply put: I don't feel like paying that annual tribute to Apple for upgrades. I'm not that wealthy. It's why I drive a tiny Honda that gets 70mpg rather than an expensive Acura that guzzles gasoline.
>>>OSX has artificial, arguably anticompetitive restrictions on what hardware it will run on, which is why it takes more than just coming up with equivalent hardware to run it on a non-Apple computer.
>>>
False.
You can run OS X on other, cheaper Intel machines from Dell or Gateway or whoever. All you need it the necessary hacking program which I believe is called "LeonardAssist" to turn your $500 PC clone into something as powerful as the overpriced $1000 Mac variant. So yes the Honda v. Acura was an appropriate analogy.
>>>Most parts for the Honda Accord are manufactured in Ohio from 3rd parties. Not just imported and assembled, actually designed and built here.
>>>
Ahhh that explains all the recent negative complaints about the Accord's poor quality.
(ducks spitball)
>>>Bing is just the fox news of search engines.
That's good! If Bing was the CNN or MSNBC of search engines, then virtually every search would lead to the National Socialists website. The CNN/NBC reporters love their "Big Daddy" government, and their stories are all biased to the assumption we need more government.
That's a common claim, but it's proven false by places like England that used to have commercial-free television (BBC). Were British goods any cheaper to buy than American goods? Nope. In fact lack-of-advertising drives costs up, as fewer goods are sold and the cost to produce each item increases (reverse economoy of scale), so British goods used to cost more than U.S. goods.
Plus, the advertised goods have to compete against non-advertised goods (store brands), so even if prices did start to rise on the frequently-advertised Pepsi for example, you could just buy RC Cola instead, which has no advertising dollars in the pricetag.
One final thought:
Being the cheapass that I am, not only don't buy I television or radio programs, I also buy very little of anything else. So I'm making-out very well with the "free" model versus the "pay" model of broadcasting.
Ya know it helps if you actually read the articles you link. QUOTE:
"Increases in inequality lead to more growth," the paper's authors wrote. "There appears to be some trickle-down effect in the long run." i.e. The $1/hour increase for engineers/managers that I discussed in my great-great-grandparent post.
>>>The Daily Mail is attacking ID cards because it hates, hates, hates the current UK government. Think of them Fox News in newspaper form.
>>>
Oh good. I thought you were going to say they are like CNN or MSNBC - leftist "we need government to run people's lives from conception to death" propaganda machines. If DM is like Fox then that's not good, but it's also not that bad.
At least they're not like CBN (Christian Broadcast Network).
I used those CDs to get about three years of free access in the late 90s. "Why yes my name is Harry Balzac. I'm calling to get my three months of free access. No, no, I've never used your service before - I swear."
Later one particularly good AOL deal allowed me to get a $300 computer for "free" from Best Buy in 2001, if I signed-up for an AOL account. All I needed to do was pay the sales tax ($15).
>>>Turn in your geek card.
Bah humbug. I was geek before most of ye were even born. I was using AOL before most people even heard of the internet. It started circa 1985 with Quantum Link - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_Link - a primitive version of the graphical web for Commodore users. It also gave me access to Global usenet forums like rec.arts.startrek wher you can still find my messages from the 1980s.
Then it evolved into AOL which provided early text-only Gopher and Web browser access to my Commodore Amiga. Even today I'm still using their "Netscape Web Accelerator" for dialup access, which is simply AOL by a different name. I'm amazed this company has managed to last for so long.
>>>People (i.e., "the talent") are a resource to be acquired, used up and disposed of as cheaply and as profitably as possible.
>>>
That's okay because the company's bank account is just a resource for me to suck as much money as possible, for the least work as possible, before my one-year contract expires. (Also the free pens and paper and staplers are a nice, undocumented benefit too.)
It just suddenly dawned on me that I've been a customer of AOL for nearly 25 years! I joined when it was known as Quantum Link - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_Link - a primitive version of the graphical web for Commodore users. Then it evolved into AOL which provided early text-only internet access.
Even today I'm still using their "Netscape Web Accelerator" for dialup access, which is simply AOL by a different name. I'm amazed this company has managed to last for so long.
>>>Freedom includes the freedom to err.
Freedom also includes the right to keep your personal information AWAY from the government, without having to fear you'll get arrested when you say "no" if some cop demands your ID, or your medical information, or your social security number.
>>>Is there a country in the World that has an ID card system that can't be forged/cloned???
The old fashioned ink-on-paper method with a few holograms added is very effective. There's no way for someone to read that ID as long as you keep it on your wallet, out of view. In contrast the RFIDs are literally broadcasting your information to anyone within ~10 feet distance, which is an extremely-stupid design.
The Parliamentarian mandate for RFIDs is similar to the stupidity that gave us a bunch of computer-controlled voting booths (which are easily hacked, or prone to errors). The politicians don't understand technology. To them it's just "magic" that will cure everything, therefore they mandate this stuff without putting any thought into it, basing their decision upon faith rather than reason. They don't realize this "magic" has serious flaws that makes it less-desirable than the old paper-based methods.
>>>The BBC wouldn't want to put the Government on the spot.
Well of course not. He who holds the money controls the media. The BBC is no more going to criticize the government's ideas, than would PBS criticize the Congress. Last night while watching PBS I was amused that the PBS coverage about "Cash for Clunkers" was nothing but positive, as if it was the greatest thing the government ever did. They never mentioned the negative aspects (landfills full of cars rather than recycled, the broken-window fallacy, perfectly-good almost-new cars being destroyed, and increasing national debt load), or the Senate's desire to kill the program rather than approve more money.
According to PBS the program was a big shiny happy joyous celebration of goodness. Yay! I can easily imagine the BBC "reporting" is similar. Or as you said, "The BBC wouldn't want to put the Government on the spot."
You are not obligated to show a U.S. policeman your ID or any other papers unless (a) you're behind the wheel of a car (b) they have a warrant issued by a judge or (c) they saw you doing something illegal (probable cause).
This is what the cop did wrong in the case of the black professor:
- He should have never crossed the threshold of the house
- He had no right to demand ID of an owner standing inside the house
The proper course was for the officer to obtain a warrant from a judge, which then would have enabled him to get an ID or enter the home. Of course no judge would have issued that warrant because an anonymous phonecall is not probable cause, according to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The black professor had every right to be angry, and I would have acted in a similar fashion (and I'm a white guy). It's called the right of free speech. In your own home, you can stand there all day long calling cops shitheads and other curse words, and the cops have no authority to arrest you. That right is protected by the Supreme Law of the land.
President Obama, rather than invite the cop for a sitdown, should have stated accurately that the cop violated constitutional law.
An example of the PBS bias happened during their report on "Cash for Clunkers". Accoerding to PBS this is a fantastic program that everybody loves, and they even showed images of "shiny happy people" at the dealer to reinforced the positive message.
Never once did they mention the flaws of the program, like minivans and SUVs that look brand-new getting filled with "clunker killer" fluid and tossed into landfills. i.e. Wasteful destruction rather than recycling. Nor was it mentioned that the Senate is probably going to put a stop to the program by not adding more funds. Nor was it mentioned you can trade-in a 17mpg pickup and get a 19mpg gas-guzzling SUV, or that we're driving people into debt to buy new cars when they should be saving money to survive these hard times.
PBS' article only mentioned positive aspects, showing their clear bias in favor of big government programs, even the flawed ones. (And no this isn't the only time. PBS is biased throughout their news show.)
>>>to claim it doesn't matter is rather short-sighted
Actually if you read the CONTEXT of my post relative to other posts - what I said is that I don't need a newspaper. If there's a rampant serial killer running-around, which obviously would concern me, I'll still hear about it on the television or radio.
>>>Upon reading your sig I'm going to cut this short because you don't appear to be concerned at all with facts.
I hate prejudiced people.
You shouldn't pre-judge
somebody with stereotypes.
In most cases you jump to false conclusions, and make poor ass-umptions. Rather than label someone as part of a group like "black" or "asian" or whatever, you are much wiser to assume you know nothing about a person, and then gradually get to know him/her as an individual. For example would it surprise you to know I favor medical marijuana and homosexual or multi-partner marriages?