Believe it or not, the names in all capital letters is one of the things that conspiracy theorists try to use. A fun read is the destroyed arguments section of the Dixieland Law Journal. That page is a conspiracy site telling other conspiracy people that they're being a little too out there. The capital letters issue is explained and debunked at a link there.
affecting results?
on
Google Juice
·
· Score: 1, Redundant
How can google whacking affect the results of searches? Oh no, the purity of my search for "orangeade sentient" will be ruined! (If this comment gets posted to a google searchable page, that will be a googlewackable phrase for a brief period of time. You don't even need the quotes.)
A 40 gig neo MP3 player goes for $479 US. According to an online currency converter, that's $759 Cdn. The tax would be $40 * 21 = 840.
Of course you could also buy the player with no hard drive at all and then buy a 40 gig hard drive separately. Presumably then, the tax would be nothing. Odd law.
"not a 50+% unemployment depression with no end in sight. " is the quote that I was refering to. 50% unemployment usually would mean that that was the rate. If the quote was "not a 50% increase in the unemployment rate with no end in sight," that would be different
You have any sources for that claim that there is a 50% unemployment rate. Amazing how the government can claim that it's 5.5% and no one notices the difference.
If there were a 50+% unemployment rate, believe me, you'd know about it. This is why you shouldn't generalize from the people you know to the population at large.
This accusation gets hurled a lot, but I've never actually seen evidence for it. Is there a website or something that details this? I actually worked on the Office team for a while (just a contractor... and I was laid off in that screw the contractors round of firing so no love lost between us) and there was no evidence that the Office and Windows teams got along much better than Office and (say) Marketing. Maybe it changed by the time that I arrived, but it wasn't happening when I was there. What's the proof please?
I addressed this in another post. Rip doesn't always mean that you bought the cd. Burn doesn't mean that you're burning it for yourself.
Regardless of the legality of the actions in the commercial, it still will draw RIAA attention to Apple. Think about Replay vs the TiVo. The Replay has the 30 second skip button and the ability to share shows with friends. The TiVo skip button is at best hidden (some firmwares don't have it at all) and doesn't have the sharing option. Which one is the tv industry going after.
The second I saw the rip/mix/burn commercial, I knew that the music industry was going to be annoyed and it's fine with me. Like I said, if they focus on the iPod, they might not notice my Neo player.
Gee, I wonder how anyone could possibily associate illegal activity with the idea of ripping cds. It's almost as though there was a popular program that existed to trade ripped files and people posted to slashdot, gloating that the end of the recording industry was near.
How many people can honestly claim that they have no illegal mp3s? I support fair use. The first thing I do with a new cd is to rip it. However, I'm not so naive to think that people don't use this technology to avoid buying cds, and I also fail to get stunned when I see record labels get upset over that.
Step 4: Burn 100 copies and give them to your other friends.
The ad is perfectly legal, but it did have the effect of focusing the music industry's attention on Apple. Hmmmm maybe they'll focus so hard on Apple that they'll forget about my Neo MP3 Player.
That only works if none of these burned copies are given to friends.
I was worried about that ad a lot just because I love my mp3 player. The more we gloat about how easy it is to get music without buying it, the more the RIAA is going to come down on people who actually do buy cds but only listen to them in MP3 form. You have to lay low sometimes.
Rip/Mix/Burn isn't very subtle. It's not very suprising that someone was going to notice this and be annoyed. It wasn't very subtle at all. It's yet another opening shot in the war between the computer industry and the RIAA. I'm rooting for Apple in this one obviously.
From the webmaster's perspective though, not allowing cut and paste can be a feature, as opposed to cluelessness. It's one step away from the information age utopia we have been having.
You can't cut and paste from a flash site. I could see big corporate webmasters loving that (HA! They'd have to go to our site to see our content.), but it would be annoying for anyone who uses the web for research.
My copy of Suzanne Vega's self titled cd that I bought in 1986 still plays perfectly. One would presume that cd making technology has only gotten better since then.
I've been providing a service for two or three years now. I always had it be completely free (actually the web hosting costs me money). Once I started it out as being free, I didn't feel like I could have ever charged for it. At the height of the dot com silliness, perhaps I could have been making a thousand dollars a month or so for it, but it never would have felt right to me. Once my site stopped becoming my hobby and started becoming my job, the fun would leech out of it.
In Washington, "actively looking for a job" means making 3 contacts a week. I have collected unemployment three times in my life (when my contracts ran out), and saw the evolution in the process.
The first time, everyone had to apply in person for the first week. While waiting for the office to open, I stood outside and talked to some people who had collected unemployment a lot before. They talked about cheating the system; they copied business names from a phone book to make them their contacts. Due to widespread scamming of that system, the agency gave up for a while and just said that you had to be looking.
My last time of unemployment was in summer 2000. The system had changed again. You had to list your three contacts every week on a form that - in theory - could be audited. I wasn't. Three contacts a week didn't exactly take long. If Tod was as worried about his situation as he said he was, I'd be surprised if he didn't try calling a recruiter or two a week. Do that and all of a sudden you're legal.
I don't know about that. At most of my interviews, I've brought up my Phish Stats website as a way of proving that I know how to write perl. It usually helps a lot in showing that I can write a decent web app.
Slashdot Mirror
Lisa: Hey dad, what's purple and commutes with all of its elements?
Homer: I don't care
Lisa: An Abelian Grape
Homer: Lisa go to your ro... mmmmmmmmmmmmmm grapes.
It would disprove fermat's theorem. Disprove by counterexample is a valid technique.
See my comment lower down on the page. This argument was used to lose tax cases, not win them.
Believe it or not, the names in all capital letters is one of the things that conspiracy theorists try to use. A fun read is the destroyed arguments section of the Dixieland Law Journal. That page is a conspiracy site telling other conspiracy people that they're being a little too out there. The capital letters issue is explained and debunked at a link there.
My PIN is pi... The last 4 digits.
How can google whacking affect the results of searches? Oh no, the purity of my search for "orangeade sentient" will be ruined! (If this comment gets posted to a google searchable page, that will be a googlewackable phrase for a brief period of time. You don't even need the quotes.)
Real is at least partially in Seattle. They have an office in Belltown right by the Sound.
A 40 gig neo MP3 player goes for $479 US. According to an online currency converter, that's $759 Cdn. The tax would be $40 * 21 = 840.
Of course you could also buy the player with no hard drive at all and then buy a 40 gig hard drive separately. Presumably then, the tax would be nothing. Odd law.
"not a 50+% unemployment depression with no end in sight. " is the quote that I was refering to. 50% unemployment usually would mean that that was the rate. If the quote was "not a 50% increase in the unemployment rate with no end in sight," that would be different
Where do you get 10%. That's twice as high as the reported market share of 5%.
You have any sources for that claim that there is a 50% unemployment rate. Amazing how the government can claim that it's 5.5% and no one notices the difference.
If there were a 50+% unemployment rate, believe me, you'd know about it. This is why you shouldn't generalize from the people you know to the population at large.
You forgot to mention the friendly fans who never take on a condescending tone.
This accusation gets hurled a lot, but I've never actually seen evidence for it. Is there a website or something that details this? I actually worked on the Office team for a while (just a contractor... and I was laid off in that screw the contractors round of firing so no love lost between us) and there was no evidence that the Office and Windows teams got along much better than Office and (say) Marketing. Maybe it changed by the time that I arrived, but it wasn't happening when I was there. What's the proof please?
I addressed this in another post. Rip doesn't always mean that you bought the cd. Burn doesn't mean that you're burning it for yourself.
Regardless of the legality of the actions in the commercial, it still will draw RIAA attention to Apple. Think about Replay vs the TiVo. The Replay has the 30 second skip button and the ability to share shows with friends. The TiVo skip button is at best hidden (some firmwares don't have it at all) and doesn't have the sharing option. Which one is the tv industry going after.
The second I saw the rip/mix/burn commercial, I knew that the music industry was going to be annoyed and it's fine with me. Like I said, if they focus on the iPod, they might not notice my Neo player.
Gee, I wonder how anyone could possibily associate illegal activity with the idea of ripping cds. It's almost as though there was a popular program that existed to trade ripped files and people posted to slashdot, gloating that the end of the recording industry was near.
How many people can honestly claim that they have no illegal mp3s? I support fair use. The first thing I do with a new cd is to rip it. However, I'm not so naive to think that people don't use this technology to avoid buying cds, and I also fail to get stunned when I see record labels get upset over that.
The problem comes in step 0 and step 4.
Step 0: Borrow cd from a friend
Step 4: Burn 100 copies and give them to your other friends.
The ad is perfectly legal, but it did have the effect of focusing the music industry's attention on Apple. Hmmmm maybe they'll focus so hard on Apple that they'll forget about my Neo MP3 Player.
That only works if none of these burned copies are given to friends.
I was worried about that ad a lot just because I love my mp3 player. The more we gloat about how easy it is to get music without buying it, the more the RIAA is going to come down on people who actually do buy cds but only listen to them in MP3 form. You have to lay low sometimes.
Rip/Mix/Burn isn't very subtle. It's not very suprising that someone was going to notice this and be annoyed. It wasn't very subtle at all. It's yet another opening shot in the war between the computer industry and the RIAA. I'm rooting for Apple in this one obviously.
From the webmaster's perspective though, not allowing cut and paste can be a feature, as opposed to cluelessness. It's one step away from the information age utopia we have been having.
You can't cut and paste from a flash site. I could see big corporate webmasters loving that (HA! They'd have to go to our site to see our content.), but it would be annoying for anyone who uses the web for research.
My copy of Suzanne Vega's self titled cd that I bought in 1986 still plays perfectly. One would presume that cd making technology has only gotten better since then.
I've been providing a service for two or three years now. I always had it be completely free (actually the web hosting costs me money). Once I started it out as being free, I didn't feel like I could have ever charged for it. At the height of the dot com silliness, perhaps I could have been making a thousand dollars a month or so for it, but it never would have felt right to me. Once my site stopped becoming my hobby and started becoming my job, the fun would leech out of it.
In Washington, "actively looking for a job" means making 3 contacts a week. I have collected unemployment three times in my life (when my contracts ran out), and saw the evolution in the process.
The first time, everyone had to apply in person for the first week. While waiting for the office to open, I stood outside and talked to some people who had collected unemployment a lot before. They talked about cheating the system; they copied business names from a phone book to make them their contacts. Due to widespread scamming of that system, the agency gave up for a while and just said that you had to be looking.
My last time of unemployment was in summer 2000. The system had changed again. You had to list your three contacts every week on a form that - in theory - could be audited. I wasn't. Three contacts a week didn't exactly take long. If Tod was as worried about his situation as he said he was, I'd be surprised if he didn't try calling a recruiter or two a week. Do that and all of a sudden you're legal.
I got hired... I just was contracting for a while.
I don't know about that. At most of my interviews, I've brought up my Phish Stats website as a way of proving that I know how to write perl. It usually helps a lot in showing that I can write a decent web app.