NO!!! really??? are you sure??????? of course i know, it's just that it took me a few seconds to realize that the german hadn't figured out a way to add another few bits to ip addresses and this was actually a number. the headline's kinda confusing (at least for me!)
Why not concentrate on something useful, like making Samba and NT to cooperate better ?
If i had any moderation points left, this would already be a (score 0, troll) article...
since when did the open source movement start telling people to stop development on any field because this other field is more important? if that was the case we could argue that maybe we should be growing from netware up to make linux/unix better, and stop working with samba since NT is already a piece of crap. but we don't say that because open source offeres something for everyone, regardless of what the ohters say. your argument is as bad as the one used by people who say that we shouldn't spend money on space travel becasue there's still a lot of problems here on earth that need solving.
Besides, Netware is not horrible and you know it. I've never come across any system that was as intuitive and easy to administer than Netware, but i don't think that's what this is about.
$20K per building? and you have to wire several buildings to form a mesh? I'm still not sure this is a good deal, that would depend on the number of buildings recomended for a network on a given city and that would depend on the weather and other common interferences in that area plus the average distance between buildings...
anyway, if they're using cheap CD-ROM lasers, why don't they just have 30 of them going from one building to the other in several different angles and heights and have all of them transmit the same signal. that way you would have to stop all lasers at the same time to drop a bit.... dunno, maybe that doesn't add up either. how much is a CD-ROM laser this days when a cheap unit costs under 50 bucks? what about the receivers?
One thing I noticed about the article is that the term "nanotechnology" or "nanocomputers" wasn't mentioned once.
The closer they got was "nano-sized computers" and an institute called nanosystems.
I don't think this is coincidence. After a lot of media coverage of stories like Bill Joy's paper (which i read and liked very much, but didn't totally agree with) the term nanotechnology has been made to have a negative ring to it.
then you have all the nonesense far less inteligent people have said, plus some very cool renditions like Deus Ex, and what you have is instant holocaust. soon nanotechnology will sound as bad as nuclear reactors and genetic engineering to a lot of people (they all sound fine to me).
I'm NOT reading this article. period. I've got too much work to do and i'm already distracted enough. I'll just say one thing... I hope RobotJox was number one....
There are two main arguments by microsoft (according to the article):
- that even if two copies of the software are identical technically, a license assigned to one cannot be used for the other
- you must pay for the license to a product even if you don't use that product and you erase it completely.
first of all, how can they assign a license to a software and make it so that that license can only be used with that copy of the software when there's not even physical media involved (the software comes pre-loaded) and no way to differentiate it? this is technically impossible (prove me i wiped it out and insatalled it from a different media)
then there's the issue of having to pay for a license you just don't use...i don't think i need to elaborate.
the only way this would work in my head is if they accepted to give a refund for the copy of the software you're not using (wasn't this done before with pre-loaded ms s/w?)...
First off, even if ToysRus discloses in their privacy policy that they use coremetrics, and even if ToysRus has a contract with coremetrics that prohibits coremetrics to use my information, if they actually do use it in some illegal form (or in any way that affects me), i haven't signed or approved any kind of contract between myself and coremetrics, meaning that the use of my information is regulated only by a contract between two parties, leaving me out of the picture. so coremetrics sells my info to a terrorist group. i sue ToysRUs (with whom i have an agreement) and they state that I agreed to a policy that allows them to give the info to coremetrics. then i sue coremetrics and they can just claim that they i never agreed to anything with them so... (this probably won't work in the US, but if it's a web server hosted in a country where laws in these issues aren'good enough...)
Also, if i've signed one privacy policy on a web site (and thus agree to use the site on their terms), and suddenly they "add" the fact that coremetrics is now involved, and i never get to re-sign the agreement, just by visiting the website my personal information would be compromised without me ever knowing.
Just to state what most people consider obvious but might not be to the newbies, and to go on record:
the reason bugtrap or whoever might list much more bugs and vulnerabilities for linux than for Windows is that linux is open source, meaning there are thousands of people developing for it that are able to find bugs and post them. most likely they'll be resolved in the next release of whatever had the bug.
now if windows was open source (meaning we could have the sourcecode to all those dll's and other binary files) we would see more bugs listed than in starship troopers. it's just HARD to spot a bug when you use microsoft platforms (which i'm foreced to do too often) because you never know what locked your computer up, or what's broken or what's too old or too new. you basically have to wait for ms to officially declare something "a bug" to be completely sure.
I'm glad to see that we're both well educated on this issue and we just happen to either interpret information differently or simply have different views of the same events. This sort of diversity is very healthy and I now respect your possition on this subject since it's probably based either on fact or on a very thorough effort to get to it.
No i don't hate the US (actually i love the place and the people, i just can't stand the government, specially when in control by the republicans) and yes I have read the buneau-varilla treaty, the herran-hay treaty and the torrijos-carter treaty, i just happen to be a history buff regarding anything from simon bolivar to noriega (that bastard). of course you would know the history as it is probably told in the US on the discovery channel, but you would have to have lived here, on the other side of the fence (the Panama Canal comission fence) and have read the letters (like the ones that lead to the herran-hay treaty) and seen the treaty version signed by panama and the one approved by congress and so on. several of your statements are flawed or misleading (i.e. panamanians were assigned as deputies AFTER the torrijos-carter treaty; we never agreed to have the canal built, we just didn't have a saying there). this is not the time nor the place to discuss US-Panama relationships (of which i have a collage minor based on US and Panamanian books) so i'll just stop.
you would think that right? well back in 77 carter signed that treaty with panama and to our surprise, the one that congress approved was different than the one we signed. once again, no consultation. and what did the changes state? that the US would have the capability to intervene with military force without asking, for eternity, if they thought the neutrality of the canal was compromised. of course no definition of neutrality and no room for arbitration allowed. so we got it back, filled with buried landmines and unexploded explosives that the US refuses to clean up.
Oh I'm so glad to hear this. As someone that has had to live with US imposed economic sanctions, biased treaties, self serving "bilateral" agreements, and in general the result of the huge leverage US negotiators ALWAYS count on, i'm pleased to see (and at the same time disgusted) that things don't always go the US way (of course after they've milked the damn suckers for years). So they're the world's only superpower, i know, let's bully everybody else so that we stay there! oh and BTW let's sue Bill Gates for doing the same!!! i say rot in hell to both uncle sam and BillG. i know i'll get flamed to ashes, but in your heart you know i'm right. Did any of you ever read a treaty on the Panama Canal? they basically read something like "we're god you know, so we'll build this godly thing called a canal, and we'll do it in your best piece of land, and we'll own it forever and profit from it forever, and your laws won't apply to the area we control and you'll never get it back and we won't pay you a dime, deal? of course the "panamanian negotiator" was actually a european guy payed by the US government to represent Panama without informing us!! well, stuff like this has happen to basically every country that has gotten into some kind of agreement with the US over anything, from rocket launches to importing bananas (and you don't want me to go there believe me...). and if you don't comply they'll basically either manipulate the IFI's and WMF into giving you lower investment ratings, add you to a black list in either money laundry, drug trafficing or anything else that will put economic preasure so that you eventually budge and accept their terms. god i can go on forever, but i already lost all my karma in offtopicness with this post. the stuff going on with the music industry and DeCSS is not domestic affairs, it's the way the US makes business internationally too. (or do you really believe that only powerful companies behave like that and not super powerful governments? who do you think thaguht who?)
You being someone that "was there" to witness the evolution of computers to what they are today, what are you thoughts on where we'll be 5, 10 and 20 years from now? will PC's go away? will voice recognition and handwritting recognition stick? will virtual reality ever make it? 3d web? wireless web? etc...
1- make the selling of domain names illegal unless you're a legitimate domain registration entity. (let's not get into the definition of that and the whole ICANN'T ordeal)
2- prohibit ownership of a domain name for X period of time unless you actually use it (and of course this would be impossible to implement)
of course, i'm not god and god's not on the internet...
this post is a testament to futility since no one will read it by now, but i just have to spill my guts over this... has anyone noticed how CNN and the likes make all the noise in the world when the US launches as much as a pebble to sub-orbital altitude, but when the russians do something like the first comercial manned space flight, or the picture perfect docking of a space statin module that due to many delays and lack of money was more likely to burn in the atmosphere rather than actually accomplish ALL objectives, flawlessly, on time (once launched of course), they barely mention it? every single news article for the past year on CNN regarding the module had at least 4 paragraphs saying how the russians were late but were pouring money to mir (and that's not even true if you look at the timeline) and how, if it crashed, blah blah. well it didn't and they barely have 2-3 paragraphs worth of news and only deserved a mention in headline news, not even a full report!!!!
make up your mind jon, is this about the Hunkapiller Syndrom or about the morale questions brought up by the Genome Project? you dedicate more than 60% of your article to a different issue than the one you're trying to address... if it was software it would be a trojan horse.
now I do have some comments regarding one of your points (the syndrom one): bill gates is not consider a predator/liar for the same reasons churchill is not considered a drunk and hitler is not considered a good schoolboy. people are remembered for their most important contribution. Bill gate's most important contribution, for most people, happens to be the fact that he owns the company that makes the software that made it possible for the "masses" to use computers. ask most people who is bill gates and they will tell you that he's the guy that invented windows (yeah right), not the guy who stomps on competition with a predator like agenda. that's just the way it is and the way it will always be (or do you relly think graham bell and alba edison deseve all the credit they get?). making an article stating that this is wrong is as relevant as making an article regarding how wrong it is for humans to lie or cheat or have sex when they're 12.
if you were trying to write about the morales of handling DNA related information, then say so, admit it and give us your comments. don't patronize us (me) and try to sneak your thoughts in using a different topic.
I ran an ISP in Panama for a couple of years a couple of years ago, and at the same time got to know a lot of the infrastructure in most central and south american countries, which represent a good sample of the world when it comes to Internet connectivity. My view on things is that, were the US to suddenly go down in a ball of fire, or if bill gates gets ellected president and gets legistlation passed that would force windows on all ISP servers in the US, most countries would be disconnected from other countries, but local (domestic) traffic would still route. most countries by now have the equivalent of a MAE and route local traffic among themselves (this is not as obvious as it sounds, since there's a TON of pollitical and economical issues to be resovled before you can get this going in most countries) and use US connectivity through satellite and/or fiber for their international traffic. I know there's a lot of intra europe connectivity going on, but would think that most of europe-to-assia traffic would go through the US (please correct me if i'm wrong). The bottom line is that you would still be able to route traffic locally until you can get connectivity to somewhere else that would make a good hubbing place like the UK (specially that island owned by that guy a few miles off their coast). So the bottom line is that we would be partially cut off for like a month, and then back online.
now if you asked me about content, well, that's a different matter. most internet content is hosted in US servers due to the fact that most ISPs can get to the US pretty fast and interconnection among US ISPs is excellent compared to the rest of the world. In the case of the ball of fire, we would have to hire that guy that's trying to save the history of the internet. If it's the case of bill gates getting elected, then nothing could ever be done, and all connectivity, caching systems and redundant links would be saturated forever due to direct email marketing campagins from microsoft using the database they've collected for years in secret using the task scheduler and registration forms.
I see two things happening here and can't decide which it is...
1- King's really on the publisher's side (who BTW made him make the tons of money he has through marketing (his novels are not THAT good, IMHO Koontz is way better, but they're all the same)), and the only thing he's trying to prove is that the whole thing doesn't work (bypassing the publisher), while at the same time he gets some credit for trying. think about it, makes sense to me.
2- the other option is the fact that there are several small planets worth of people online today and if a very small portion of those readers pays the buck, he'll make his money. I think you can't compare studies like the scientific american one or similar others to this, mainly because the amount of people that know king and will be hit by the free marketing campaign (read headline news, talkshows and websites) are prone to just log on, pay a dollar and check it out (what's a dollar worth to you?).
will this work for all artists?? hell no, unless you have a huge fan base, or you make it to the news.
what will be proven in the end? absolutely nothing, because the technology that will make the whole damn thing work isn't widely available yet: some software that protects novels and songs against copying. this is the only way that you will see intellectual property distributed over the internet at a gain for the artist and in a popular common manner. many people disagree, but all other methods have failed so far (napster) if you look at it from the artists perspective.
It seems pretty obvious to me that what they're doing is to have Scully take Mulder's paper as the big believer, sort of like a student turned master (with all those references to past Mulder experiences in nostalgic rememberance), while T1K does the skeptic part... sort of like a renewed more of the same...
I dunno... is it me or we all thought the logical expansion path for Palm was color? at least i thought so.. i've own a palm for a long time now and the only problem i see with it is the absense of color, it does everything else i need it to. their IIIc version wasn't that great a success, but i thought they would keep on trying...
so now the question, why are these new models better? IMHO if they were software they would be a.1 release, not a major upgrade...
Slashdot Mirror
NO!!! really??? are you sure???????
of course i know, it's just that it took me a few seconds to realize that the german hadn't figured out a way to add another few bits to ip addresses and this was actually a number. the headline's kinda confusing (at least for me!)
all of almost 2.5 million connected .de-domains distributed over 205.540 IP addresses
wow! I want an ip in that network! 205.540.1.1 sounds nice...
Why not concentrate on something useful, like making Samba and NT to cooperate better ?
If i had any moderation points left, this would already be a (score 0, troll) article...
since when did the open source movement start telling people to stop development on any field because this other field is more important? if that was the case we could argue that maybe we should be growing from netware up to make linux/unix better, and stop working with samba since NT is already a piece of crap. but we don't say that because open source offeres something for everyone, regardless of what the ohters say. your argument is as bad as the one used by people who say that we shouldn't spend money on space travel becasue there's still a lot of problems here on earth that need solving.
Besides, Netware is not horrible and you know it. I've never come across any system that was as intuitive and easy to administer than Netware, but i don't think that's what this is about.
And for anyone who still don't get it, "manos" is spanish for hands
$20K per building? and you have to wire several buildings to form a mesh? I'm still not sure this is a good deal, that would depend on the number of buildings recomended for a network on a given city and that would depend on the weather and other common interferences in that area plus the average distance between buildings...
anyway, if they're using cheap CD-ROM lasers, why don't they just have 30 of them going from one building to the other in several different angles and heights and have all of them transmit the same signal. that way you would have to stop all lasers at the same time to drop a bit.... dunno, maybe that doesn't add up either. how much is a CD-ROM laser this days when a cheap unit costs under 50 bucks? what about the receivers?
One thing I noticed about the article is that the term "nanotechnology" or "nanocomputers" wasn't mentioned once.
The closer they got was "nano-sized computers" and an institute called nanosystems.
I don't think this is coincidence. After a lot of media coverage of stories like Bill Joy's paper (which i read and liked very much, but didn't totally agree with) the term nanotechnology has been made to have a negative ring to it.
then you have all the nonesense far less inteligent people have said, plus some very cool renditions like Deus Ex, and what you have is instant holocaust. soon nanotechnology will sound as bad as nuclear reactors and genetic engineering to a lot of people (they all sound fine to me).
anyhow, congrats to the research team.
I'm NOT reading this article. period. I've got too much work to do and i'm already distracted enough. I'll just say one thing... I hope RobotJox was number one....
Wasn't IE so tied to the OS that one without the other was like oreo cookies without the white stuffing? Hypocrites. Explain THAT to the judge....
LNUS INTC2 VAPR LOJUCE MNYPIT
anyhow, i hope they do great.
There are two main arguments by microsoft (according to the article):
- that even if two copies of the software are identical technically, a license assigned to one cannot be used for the other
- you must pay for the license to a product even if you don't use that product and you erase it completely.
first of all, how can they assign a license to a software and make it so that that license can only be used with that copy of the software when there's not even physical media involved (the software comes pre-loaded) and no way to differentiate it? this is technically impossible (prove me i wiped it out and insatalled it from a different media)
then there's the issue of having to pay for a license you just don't use...i don't think i need to elaborate.
the only way this would work in my head is if they accepted to give a refund for the copy of the software you're not using (wasn't this done before with pre-loaded ms s/w?)...
First off, even if ToysRus discloses in their privacy policy that they use coremetrics, and even if ToysRus has a contract with coremetrics that prohibits coremetrics to use my information, if they actually do use it in some illegal form (or in any way that affects me), i haven't signed or approved any kind of contract between myself and coremetrics, meaning that the use of my information is regulated only by a contract between two parties, leaving me out of the picture. so coremetrics sells my info to a terrorist group. i sue ToysRUs (with whom i have an agreement) and they state that I agreed to a policy that allows them to give the info to coremetrics. then i sue coremetrics and they can just claim that they i never agreed to anything with them so... (this probably won't work in the US, but if it's a web server hosted in a country where laws in these issues aren'good enough...)
Also, if i've signed one privacy policy on a web site (and thus agree to use the site on their terms), and suddenly they "add" the fact that coremetrics is now involved, and i never get to re-sign the agreement, just by visiting the website my personal information would be compromised without me ever knowing.
i don't like it one bit.
Just to state what most people consider obvious but might not be to the newbies, and to go on record:
the reason bugtrap or whoever might list much more bugs and vulnerabilities for linux than for Windows is that linux is open source, meaning there are thousands of people developing for it that are able to find bugs and post them. most likely they'll be resolved in the next release of whatever had the bug.
now if windows was open source (meaning we could have the sourcecode to all those dll's and other binary files) we would see more bugs listed than in starship troopers. it's just HARD to spot a bug when you use microsoft platforms (which i'm foreced to do too often) because you never know what locked your computer up, or what's broken or what's too old or too new. you basically have to wait for ms to officially declare something "a bug" to be completely sure.
or at least this is what i think...
Napster Clone Wiht Pay Per Download
Wiht? What an ugly name for a napster clone!
I'm glad to see that we're both well educated on this issue and we just happen to either interpret information differently or simply have different views of the same events. This sort of diversity is very healthy and I now respect your possition on this subject since it's probably based either on fact or on a very thorough effort to get to it.
No i don't hate the US (actually i love the place and the people, i just can't stand the government, specially when in control by the republicans) and yes I have read the buneau-varilla treaty, the herran-hay treaty and the torrijos-carter treaty, i just happen to be a history buff regarding anything from simon bolivar to noriega (that bastard). of course you would know the history as it is probably told in the US on the discovery channel, but you would have to have lived here, on the other side of the fence (the Panama Canal comission fence) and have read the letters (like the ones that lead to the herran-hay treaty) and seen the treaty version signed by panama and the one approved by congress and so on. several of your statements are flawed or misleading (i.e. panamanians were assigned as deputies AFTER the torrijos-carter treaty; we never agreed to have the canal built, we just didn't have a saying there). this is not the time nor the place to discuss US-Panama relationships (of which i have a collage minor based on US and Panamanian books) so i'll just stop.
you would think that right? well back in 77 carter signed that treaty with panama and to our surprise, the one that congress approved was different than the one we signed. once again, no consultation. and what did the changes state? that the US would have the capability to intervene with military force without asking, for eternity, if they thought the neutrality of the canal was compromised. of course no definition of neutrality and no room for arbitration allowed. so we got it back, filled with buried landmines and unexploded explosives that the US refuses to clean up.
Oh I'm so glad to hear this. As someone that has had to live with US imposed economic sanctions, biased treaties, self serving "bilateral" agreements, and in general the result of the huge leverage US negotiators ALWAYS count on, i'm pleased to see (and at the same time disgusted) that things don't always go the US way (of course after they've milked the damn suckers for years). So they're the world's only superpower, i know, let's bully everybody else so that we stay there! oh and BTW let's sue Bill Gates for doing the same!!! i say rot in hell to both uncle sam and BillG. i know i'll get flamed to ashes, but in your heart you know i'm right. Did any of you ever read a treaty on the Panama Canal? they basically read something like "we're god you know, so we'll build this godly thing called a canal, and we'll do it in your best piece of land, and we'll own it forever and profit from it forever, and your laws won't apply to the area we control and you'll never get it back and we won't pay you a dime, deal? of course the "panamanian negotiator" was actually a european guy payed by the US government to represent Panama without informing us!! well, stuff like this has happen to basically every country that has gotten into some kind of agreement with the US over anything, from rocket launches to importing bananas (and you don't want me to go there believe me...). and if you don't comply they'll basically either manipulate the IFI's and WMF into giving you lower investment ratings, add you to a black list in either money laundry, drug trafficing or anything else that will put economic preasure so that you eventually budge and accept their terms. god i can go on forever, but i already lost all my karma in offtopicness with this post. the stuff going on with the music industry and DeCSS is not domestic affairs, it's the way the US makes business internationally too. (or do you really believe that only powerful companies behave like that and not super powerful governments? who do you think thaguht who?)
ranting off.
And now the mandatory question:
You being someone that "was there" to witness the evolution of computers to what they are today, what are you thoughts on where we'll be 5, 10 and 20 years from now? will PC's go away? will voice recognition and handwritting recognition stick? will virtual reality ever make it? 3d web? wireless web? etc...
... I would do two things:
1- make the selling of domain names illegal unless you're a legitimate domain registration entity. (let's not get into the definition of that and the whole ICANN'T ordeal)
2- prohibit ownership of a domain name for X period of time unless you actually use it (and of course this would be impossible to implement)
of course, i'm not god and god's not on the internet...
this post is a testament to futility since no one will read it by now, but i just have to spill my guts over this... has anyone noticed how CNN and the likes make all the noise in the world when the US launches as much as a pebble to sub-orbital altitude, but when the russians do something like the first comercial manned space flight, or the picture perfect docking of a space statin module that due to many delays and lack of money was more likely to burn in the atmosphere rather than actually accomplish ALL objectives, flawlessly, on time (once launched of course), they barely mention it? every single news article for the past year on CNN regarding the module had at least 4 paragraphs saying how the russians were late but were pouring money to mir (and that's not even true if you look at the timeline) and how, if it crashed, blah blah. well it didn't and they barely have 2-3 paragraphs worth of news and only deserved a mention in headline news, not even a full report!!!!
make up your mind jon, is this about the Hunkapiller Syndrom or about the morale questions brought up by the Genome Project? you dedicate more than 60% of your article to a different issue than the one you're trying to address... if it was software it would be a trojan horse.
now I do have some comments regarding one of your points (the syndrom one): bill gates is not consider a predator/liar for the same reasons churchill is not considered a drunk and hitler is not considered a good schoolboy. people are remembered for their most important contribution. Bill gate's most important contribution, for most people, happens to be the fact that he owns the company that makes the software that made it possible for the "masses" to use computers. ask most people who is bill gates and they will tell you that he's the guy that invented windows (yeah right), not the guy who stomps on competition with a predator like agenda. that's just the way it is and the way it will always be (or do you relly think graham bell and alba edison deseve all the credit they get?). making an article stating that this is wrong is as relevant as making an article regarding how wrong it is for humans to lie or cheat or have sex when they're 12.
if you were trying to write about the morales of handling DNA related information, then say so, admit it and give us your comments. don't patronize us (me) and try to sneak your thoughts in using a different topic.
I ran an ISP in Panama for a couple of years a couple of years ago, and at the same time got to know a lot of the infrastructure in most central and south american countries, which represent a good sample of the world when it comes to Internet connectivity. My view on things is that, were the US to suddenly go down in a ball of fire, or if bill gates gets ellected president and gets legistlation passed that would force windows on all ISP servers in the US, most countries would be disconnected from other countries, but local (domestic) traffic would still route. most countries by now have the equivalent of a MAE and route local traffic among themselves (this is not as obvious as it sounds, since there's a TON of pollitical and economical issues to be resovled before you can get this going in most countries) and use US connectivity through satellite and/or fiber for their international traffic. I know there's a lot of intra europe connectivity going on, but would think that most of europe-to-assia traffic would go through the US (please correct me if i'm wrong). The bottom line is that you would still be able to route traffic locally until you can get connectivity to somewhere else that would make a good hubbing place like the UK (specially that island owned by that guy a few miles off their coast). So the bottom line is that we would be partially cut off for like a month, and then back online.
now if you asked me about content, well, that's a different matter. most internet content is hosted in US servers due to the fact that most ISPs can get to the US pretty fast and interconnection among US ISPs is excellent compared to the rest of the world. In the case of the ball of fire, we would have to hire that guy that's trying to save the history of the internet. If it's the case of bill gates getting elected, then nothing could ever be done, and all connectivity, caching systems and redundant links would be saturated forever due to direct email marketing campagins from microsoft using the database they've collected for years in secret using the task scheduler and registration forms.
the internet is here to stay.
I see two things happening here and can't decide which it is...
1- King's really on the publisher's side (who BTW made him make the tons of money he has through marketing (his novels are not THAT good, IMHO Koontz is way better, but they're all the same)), and the only thing he's trying to prove is that the whole thing doesn't work (bypassing the publisher), while at the same time he gets some credit for trying. think about it, makes sense to me.
2- the other option is the fact that there are several small planets worth of people online today and if a very small portion of those readers pays the buck, he'll make his money. I think you can't compare studies like the scientific american one or similar others to this, mainly because the amount of people that know king and will be hit by the free marketing campaign (read headline news, talkshows and websites) are prone to just log on, pay a dollar and check it out (what's a dollar worth to you?).
will this work for all artists?? hell no, unless you have a huge fan base, or you make it to the news.
what will be proven in the end? absolutely nothing, because the technology that will make the whole damn thing work isn't widely available yet: some software that protects novels and songs against copying. this is the only way that you will see intellectual property distributed over the internet at a gain for the artist and in a popular common manner. many people disagree, but all other methods have failed so far (napster) if you look at it from the artists perspective.
just my $0.02
It seems pretty obvious to me that what they're doing is to have Scully take Mulder's paper as the big believer, sort of like a student turned master (with all those references to past Mulder experiences in nostalgic rememberance), while T1K does the skeptic part... sort of like a renewed more of the same...
I dunno... is it me or we all thought the logical expansion path for Palm was color? at least i thought so.. i've own a palm for a long time now and the only problem i see with it is the absense of color, it does everything else i need it to. their IIIc version wasn't that great a success, but i thought they would keep on trying...
.1 release, not a major upgrade...
so now the question, why are these new models better? IMHO if they were software they would be a