Try being able to plan a trip to an aviation museum and use Google Earth to see where the hotels are so you can find one that will give you a great view of the approach path of incoming aircraft, and click on the one you want and be transported right to its website to look up room rates and make a reservation if you wish.
Just looking up addresses and getting distance info from a "find near here" site will tell you how far you have to drive, but knowing what you'll get, exactly, ahead of time, is only something that a real map can give you.
I did make the reservation, and I'm looking forward to the trip. It will be interesting to see if I can somehow upload the address easily via my Powerbook to my Garmin Streetpilot i5 so I can easily navigate there.
Further, this will stick Sony with lame-duck product, which I can't imagine is a good thing.
On the contrary.
This is the company that thought it was acceptable to install rootkits on peoples' computers, as if the computers belonged to them, all in the name of preventing imagined losses that are their own faults for bad treatment of customers and for selling inferior products.
after you install a game off 3 cd's... it eats up more hard drive space since the files on CD are compressed, and then demands that the disc be in the drive to run even though the entire fucking thing is on the hard drive, meaning that if the CD gets ruined, the software won't run, which means that you have to seek out and download and install a patch that will keep this stupidity from happening, for every bloody game you install
I've done this for everything I've got and I don't feel bad about it not one bit. The originals sit safely in their cases, no scratches involved. But geez... programmers, wake up!
I guess you really do think that major figures who worked with major organizations in the past don't have any influence at all over those major organizations that they worked with for so long and were paid so much by.
What a Bizarro World. Ever notice that former US Presidents do plenty to affect government policies, even though they're no longer employed there? Ever notice that whoever the current President is tends to listen to those people, because they have experience? Ever notice that people who are highly regarded in a field tend to get people who are still in that field to listen to them, even if they retired?
The fact that it's true doesn't make it FUD or astroturfing. Only the fact that you wish it weren't true, so you slander it so it will go away.
More astroturfing or possibly groteseque stupidity -- Proprietary DRM is the cornerstone of Apple's online music business
Or what about the fact that Apple has in the past sold computers using a "Rip. Mix. Burn" marketing campaign that seems to fly in the face of DRM? Or what about the fact that Apple tries to make it as easy as possible for its software to work with files in your music library, to create things with? Or what about the fact that many other tech writers have made the same statements, and haven't been vilified? Again, wishing something weren't true doesn't make it a lie.
they are really the limiting factor to the total size of the market and how the songs are priced and marketed.
And who forced the public to choose the iPod over the MS-centric DRM that actually does actively get in your face and can't be used as easily as iTunes downloads? Nobody held a gun to those peoples' face. The iTunes Store has the market it does because of ease of use of both players and software, and because the players that work with it work very well with little headaches and are easy to use.
Sounds like you're upset because you think the free market should have gone a different way than the one that was ultimately chosen, on top of hating the truth.
So I'm an apologist for pointing out the truth? I'm an apologist for just saying that it really is stupid to start whining about the least-offensive service when there are plenty of dumber, more-offensive DRM implementations to whine about? I guess if I were a judge you'd call me an activist judge, or whatever viewpoint I hold that might disagree with yours makes me an idiot or worse. (But it looks to me like you've already called me an idiot for telling the truth, so I guess that makes you an idiot for forgetting that everyone has the right to an opinion, and if you want yours to be respected, you can't go slandering others for having their own.)
Do you really think that she doesn't have ties to the people she used to work with, at her old organization? Kind of doubt that. So yes, I strongly suggest that she can do something. I am not going to believe for a second that she has no influence.
So are you going to lower their monthly payments for taxes, mortgages, car loans, insurance, health care, telecommunications, food, gas, and other things one needs to live?
I didn't think so.
Illegals can only work for less because they don't pay taxes or (frequently) various kinds of insurance. A friend of mine suffered $500 from a hit and run driver to his parked car who was an illegal who didn't have insurance, and his own insurance conveniently estimated the repair cost at $2 less than its deductible.
Illegals are directly screwing honest citizens over.
I don't get why she's complaining about Apple's DRM specifically. It's one of the least-annoying there is. Apple probably didn't want to add it at all but only did it grudgingly, and will drop it if it ever can, but if you're going to complain about DRM -- why not complain about the nasty stuff that really does get in the way?
What a crock. She says that something she did is wrong but isn't actually doing anything to make amends, like returning peoples' money, that I can see, and she whines about the thing least worth whining over.
If she thinks suing is wrong, then why the fuck did she allow anyone to be sued? What a hypocrite. I'll believe this when I hear that she is ordering all the money taken from dead people and 13-year-old girls and Mac users and all the other wrongfully-sued people be returned, but I don't see any hint of that. I'll believe that when the lawsuits stop.
Actions speak louder than words, and talk is cheap. Put our money where your mouth is, or fuck off.
In the case of legal contracts, though, it's constantly advised that you be sure of what you're doing before you sign. I can't count how many times I've seen advice go by to read all of a contract before you sign it, and yet when I purchased a car, there was general surprise in the room that I actually read through the pages before signing the contract for the financing. So even though a lot of people don't pay attention, that doesn't excuse them from the consequences of ignoring both common sense and very widely-given advice.
So yes, in the case of a contract, it IS their fault and they can't say they should have been told what they were signing. They had every chance to read the papers and they didn't, and now they are complaining. It's like a small child who whines when he can't stay up as late as his parents do.
When the EFF selects as a spokesman the former lyricist for the Grateful Dead
Uhm. That "spokesman" is the co-founder of the EFF. I think he's qualified. But what got me was the guy saying that the business model of allowing copying wouldn't work -- right to the face of the guy who it worked well for! Talk about denial.
I happen to have been reading at a college level for many years, you insensitive clod. Did you get that insult out of an Insults for Dummies book?
Anyway, this site is a Russian site operating under Russian law. That means, in case you wondered why it's important, that Russian law applies, and not anyone else's. If what they're doing is legal under their own law, then other nations have no standing to demand that it be taken down. Those nations can only act if their own citizens or inhabitants patronize the site.
Let's put it another way for people who apparently can't understand this: guns are legal in the US. It is legal to make guns here. So a gun maker (let's say Remington) is in the clear to produce them. Another nation, say, the United Kingdom, does not allow guns, so it does not like the fact that Remington is producing them and offering them for sale. But it cannot shut Remington down, because Remington is doing what it does in a place where what it does is legal. All it can do is prosecute any of its own citizens who obtain guns, in violation of its own laws.
Were your lips moving while you tried to read this comment? Or do I need to make it in large print?
This says nothing about whether the data is encrypted in transit or, more importantly, on the servers. I don't like the idea of Google or anyone who might hack in snooping on this data.
While I can understand wanting to get your stuff back... you did a few illegal things yourself -- jaywalking, for instance, and obstructing traffic. Is it really worth it to put your life at risk by messing around with moving traffic, just for a cell phone? It's not like cell phones aren't a dime a dozen these days (ok, not quite THAT cheap, but...) and if you lose one you can get it replaced and the service transferred, with little trouble.
You could have called it to establish it was in the guy's pocket, watched him walk toward his car, parked your car behind it to keep him from leaving, and had the attendant or a bystander call the police, without risking yourself or innocent drivers. (what if someone had hit you, the guy, or him as he peeled out?)
Why is everyone referring to these people as thieves? They FOUND the phone. They aren't guilty of a crime.
Possession of stolen property. They are aware it does not belong to them (not that you need to be aware of it to be guilty, though police don't normally charge you if you were unaware). I could buy a car from a guy off the street who didn't have legal title, and still be forced to surrender it. If I did not, I would be guilty and charged. This is a pretty open and shut case given that they know how to contact the owner, the owner has repeatedly demanded his property back without involving police, and they have not done so.
The police will now find out who they are, if the crime is reported (and there are plenty of photos here to use to find them), seize the phone, and bring charges against them.
They should have handed it over immediately. Now they deserve every bit of hurt they get.
So what if the taxi driver sold it? And speaking of the driver, the taxi driver is the one who is guilty of theft. He knew it wasn't his and took it anyway.
Slashdot Mirror
Giving someone else your prescription drugs is illegal.
So is food tampering.
I sure as hell would have called the cops on anyone I caught doing that. Still would.
If someone is deranged enough to spike someone's food with illegal substances, they need a serious morals adjustment. Or a boot to the head.
Try being able to plan a trip to an aviation museum and use Google Earth to see where the hotels are so you can find one that will give you a great view of the approach path of incoming aircraft, and click on the one you want and be transported right to its website to look up room rates and make a reservation if you wish.
Just looking up addresses and getting distance info from a "find near here" site will tell you how far you have to drive, but knowing what you'll get, exactly, ahead of time, is only something that a real map can give you.
I did make the reservation, and I'm looking forward to the trip. It will be interesting to see if I can somehow upload the address easily via my Powerbook to my Garmin Streetpilot i5 so I can easily navigate there.
It's not the programmers that need to wake up, it's the publishers.
Since when did a publishing executive know the first thing about programming such a thing? They're not the ones who put it there.
Further, this will stick Sony with lame-duck product, which I can't imagine is a good thing.
On the contrary.
This is the company that thought it was acceptable to install rootkits on peoples' computers, as if the computers belonged to them, all in the name of preventing imagined losses that are their own faults for bad treatment of customers and for selling inferior products.
The faster they die the happier we should be.
after you install a game off 3 cd's ... it eats up more hard drive space since the files on CD are compressed, and then demands that the disc be in the drive to run even though the entire fucking thing is on the hard drive, meaning that if the CD gets ruined, the software won't run, which means that you have to seek out and download and install a patch that will keep this stupidity from happening, for every bloody game you install
... programmers, wake up!
I've done this for everything I've got and I don't feel bad about it not one bit. The originals sit safely in their cases, no scratches involved. But geez
Rant over.
I guess you really do think that major figures who worked with major organizations in the past don't have any influence at all over those major organizations that they worked with for so long and were paid so much by.
What a Bizarro World. Ever notice that former US Presidents do plenty to affect government policies, even though they're no longer employed there? Ever notice that whoever the current President is tends to listen to those people, because they have experience? Ever notice that people who are highly regarded in a field tend to get people who are still in that field to listen to them, even if they retired?
Think, McFly. Think.
This is astroturfing and unsubstantiated FUD.
The fact that it's true doesn't make it FUD or astroturfing. Only the fact that you wish it weren't true, so you slander it so it will go away.
More astroturfing or possibly groteseque stupidity -- Proprietary DRM is the cornerstone of Apple's online music business
Or what about the fact that Apple has in the past sold computers using a "Rip. Mix. Burn" marketing campaign that seems to fly in the face of DRM? Or what about the fact that Apple tries to make it as easy as possible for its software to work with files in your music library, to create things with? Or what about the fact that many other tech writers have made the same statements, and haven't been vilified? Again, wishing something weren't true doesn't make it a lie.
they are really the limiting factor to the total size of the market and how the songs are priced and marketed.
And who forced the public to choose the iPod over the MS-centric DRM that actually does actively get in your face and can't be used as easily as iTunes downloads? Nobody held a gun to those peoples' face. The iTunes Store has the market it does because of ease of use of both players and software, and because the players that work with it work very well with little headaches and are easy to use.
Sounds like you're upset because you think the free market should have gone a different way than the one that was ultimately chosen, on top of hating the truth.
So I'm an apologist for pointing out the truth? I'm an apologist for just saying that it really is stupid to start whining about the least-offensive service when there are plenty of dumber, more-offensive DRM implementations to whine about? I guess if I were a judge you'd call me an activist judge, or whatever viewpoint I hold that might disagree with yours makes me an idiot or worse. (But it looks to me like you've already called me an idiot for telling the truth, so I guess that makes you an idiot for forgetting that everyone has the right to an opinion, and if you want yours to be respected, you can't go slandering others for having their own.)
Do you really think that she doesn't have ties to the people she used to work with, at her old organization? Kind of doubt that. So yes, I strongly suggest that she can do something. I am not going to believe for a second that she has no influence.
Maybe. But if you're going to complain, you start complaining to the worst offenders first.
Americans aren't willing to work for lower wages
So are you going to lower their monthly payments for taxes, mortgages, car loans, insurance, health care, telecommunications, food, gas, and other things one needs to live?
I didn't think so.
Illegals can only work for less because they don't pay taxes or (frequently) various kinds of insurance. A friend of mine suffered $500 from a hit and run driver to his parked car who was an illegal who didn't have insurance, and his own insurance conveniently estimated the repair cost at $2 less than its deductible.
Illegals are directly screwing honest citizens over.
Americans CAN'T COMPETE WHEN THE GAME IS RIGGED.
I don't get why she's complaining about Apple's DRM specifically. It's one of the least-annoying there is. Apple probably didn't want to add it at all but only did it grudgingly, and will drop it if it ever can, but if you're going to complain about DRM -- why not complain about the nasty stuff that really does get in the way?
What a crock. She says that something she did is wrong but isn't actually doing anything to make amends, like returning peoples' money, that I can see, and she whines about the thing least worth whining over.
Bitch.
I agree.
If she thinks suing is wrong, then why the fuck did she allow anyone to be sued? What a hypocrite. I'll believe this when I hear that she is ordering all the money taken from dead people and 13-year-old girls and Mac users and all the other wrongfully-sued people be returned, but I don't see any hint of that. I'll believe that when the lawsuits stop.
Actions speak louder than words, and talk is cheap. Put our money where your mouth is, or fuck off.
In the case of legal contracts, though, it's constantly advised that you be sure of what you're doing before you sign. I can't count how many times I've seen advice go by to read all of a contract before you sign it, and yet when I purchased a car, there was general surprise in the room that I actually read through the pages before signing the contract for the financing. So even though a lot of people don't pay attention, that doesn't excuse them from the consequences of ignoring both common sense and very widely-given advice.
So yes, in the case of a contract, it IS their fault and they can't say they should have been told what they were signing. They had every chance to read the papers and they didn't, and now they are complaining. It's like a small child who whines when he can't stay up as late as his parents do.
What do you have against chubby people?
The day people here do anything logical is the day my head explodes.
Who's forcing you to upgrade Firefox to a version that doesn't work on Windows 98?
Two? Hell, they've had four keyboard players die.
But were they grateful to be dead?
You missed the point.
Google's motto is "Do no evil".
Corporations do evil things.
Hence, Google becoming a RAC (tm) means that Google is being evil.
Which means Google is lying in its very motto.
When the EFF selects as a spokesman the former lyricist for the Grateful Dead
Uhm. That "spokesman" is the co-founder of the EFF. I think he's qualified. But what got me was the guy saying that the business model of allowing copying wouldn't work -- right to the face of the guy who it worked well for! Talk about denial.
I happen to have been reading at a college level for many years, you insensitive clod. Did you get that insult out of an Insults for Dummies book?
Anyway, this site is a Russian site operating under Russian law. That means, in case you wondered why it's important, that Russian law applies, and not anyone else's. If what they're doing is legal under their own law, then other nations have no standing to demand that it be taken down. Those nations can only act if their own citizens or inhabitants patronize the site.
Let's put it another way for people who apparently can't understand this: guns are legal in the US. It is legal to make guns here. So a gun maker (let's say Remington) is in the clear to produce them. Another nation, say, the United Kingdom, does not allow guns, so it does not like the fact that Remington is producing them and offering them for sale. But it cannot shut Remington down, because Remington is doing what it does in a place where what it does is legal. All it can do is prosecute any of its own citizens who obtain guns, in violation of its own laws.
Were your lips moving while you tried to read this comment? Or do I need to make it in large print?
This says nothing about whether the data is encrypted in transit or, more importantly, on the servers. I don't like the idea of Google or anyone who might hack in snooping on this data.
While I can understand wanting to get your stuff back ... you did a few illegal things yourself -- jaywalking, for instance, and obstructing traffic. Is it really worth it to put your life at risk by messing around with moving traffic, just for a cell phone? It's not like cell phones aren't a dime a dozen these days (ok, not quite THAT cheap, but...) and if you lose one you can get it replaced and the service transferred, with little trouble.
You could have called it to establish it was in the guy's pocket, watched him walk toward his car, parked your car behind it to keep him from leaving, and had the attendant or a bystander call the police, without risking yourself or innocent drivers. (what if someone had hit you, the guy, or him as he peeled out?)
Just let it go next time.
Why is everyone referring to these people as thieves? They FOUND the phone. They aren't guilty of a crime.
Possession of stolen property. They are aware it does not belong to them (not that you need to be aware of it to be guilty, though police don't normally charge you if you were unaware). I could buy a car from a guy off the street who didn't have legal title, and still be forced to surrender it. If I did not, I would be guilty and charged. This is a pretty open and shut case given that they know how to contact the owner, the owner has repeatedly demanded his property back without involving police, and they have not done so.
The police will now find out who they are, if the crime is reported (and there are plenty of photos here to use to find them), seize the phone, and bring charges against them.
They should have handed it over immediately. Now they deserve every bit of hurt they get.
So what if the taxi driver sold it? And speaking of the driver, the taxi driver is the one who is guilty of theft. He knew it wasn't his and took it anyway.
Oh heck no, but point was, I don't need to be checked, I'm not trying to hide anything, and I'm still blocking it. It's none of their damn business.