No people get picked on because they are bitches, and they will cave into the the bullies will. Being physically weak is only a part of it. Body, mind, spirit. You have to work on them all.
While it was wrong of the guy to accost you, in that situation you only have two options. You either kick him in the balls and accept that he is going to beat the crap out of you or two, you let him turn you into his bitch.
With option one he is eventually going to get tired of trying to push you around and beat you down and move on to other prey.
With option two is is going to make life hell for you for your entire high school career.
It amazes me that people in large part chose option two.
Okay, so lets look at this plan of yours to save money.
You are going to spend $300 on a low power webserver in order to save you seventy dollars per year on your electricity bill. You will still be spending approximately $30 per year on your new low powered webserver.
So, 300 + 30/yr after 7 years is 510 dollars
The savings of 70/yr after 7 years is 490 dollars.
After seven years of having a lower powered webserver, you will still be spending more money on your solution than on your problem. If you that concerned about saving money, you might just turn off your webserver.
Something wrong with your analogy is that these restaurants willingly gave you these free samples. Would these restaurants still willingly give you a free sample if you just walked in and forcefully took it?
The parent post didn't mention anything about forcefully stealing anything. The parent post said:
And the point was that you dont have demos in restaurants either, you only get to test it by purchasing.
My response was to point out that restaurants do give free samples voluntarily. I could also point out trade shows and expos where area restaurants show up as vendors and provide free samples of their menu to the thousands of potential customers that attend.
I can also go into my area supermarket on a Saturday and there will be people behind sample stations, trying to get me to test the newest brand condiment or microwave food or brand of cheese, or whatever they are pushing. These are also free samples or demos.
We were talking about the presense or absence of demos, and the idea that try before you buy has validity in the marketplace.
In Texas, I can go buy a car. If I don't like it, I have three days in which I can drive back to the dealership and terminate my contract and give them the car back. I don't even lose any money on the deal.
In any loan contract in the United States, the law states a three day Right of Recission, during which the contract can be cancelled without penalty.
Even in a movie theater, a customer can walk out after the first 30 minutes or so and demand their money back. I remember quite a few parents demanding refunds after taking their children to Happy Feet with crying children in tow.
Why shouldn't consumers of software or games get to try before they buy? Why shouldn't consumers be able to demand their money back when a game is marketed as a great experience yet it blows chunks?
The need for a Cyberdyne suit will hopefully be a stopgap for real life enhancement at the hands of doctors and biologists.
I disagree, the Cyberdyne suit is the early prototype for mass produced Guyver armor. And then the Ultimate Fighting Championship will be truly awesome to watch.
Apple's fault lies with a statement the author made in the article.
Once the phone is rebooted, all you have to do is download a cracked version of the app from one of the MANY places on the internet, add it to iTunes, sync, and you are done. NOTE: Surprisingly this is MUCH easier than actually buying it on iTunes!!
The game is 1.99 on Itunes. If it were easier to buy on Itunes than to pirate it, people wouldn't be pirating it as much. Perhaps the reason the piracy is so prevalent is that people find it easier to pirate than to purchase.
If you remember, people who had bought Spore were using pirated copies of it in order to avoid the machine crashing DRM that came bundled, or rather bungled, along with the game. In addition, there were new stories about the piracy increasing as a result of the inconvenient DRM issues.
When it is easier to pirate a game than buy it, what do you think people are going to do? Apple gets 30% of the gross from those games on the app store, so its their fault that the process of buying an app isn't easier than just pirating.
Sorry I missed your point, but again you are wrong, and probably aren't married either. When we went shopping for a baker for our wedding, we went to three different bakeries, and they all gave us free samples of cake so we could try them out.
We got four free meals in area restaurants because they wanted our business. Restaurants and bakeries and lots of other service oriented stores give demos. They aren't going to hedge on a 50 dollar meal when they could make several thousand dollars catering.
I have done exactly that. When my meal comes to me, if it doesn't taste good, I send it back and tell them to make something else. If they can't get it right the second time, I don't pay for it.
I remember at New Years Eve, 2000, my wife and I went out to a nice restaurant to celebrate, and we ordered a bottle of good champagne. We were given the taste, and it tasted like crap. So we sent back the bottle and got another one. The next bottle was heavenly. But we didn't pay for the first bottle.
We did pay for that second bottle though, since nine months later we had a son...
Excuse me?
You can argue that it is the right, morally responsible thing. The financially responsible thing is not to buy cheap games for your portable telephone.
Well, according to the article, there is one thing that is Apple's fault:
Once the phone is rebooted, all you have to do is download a cracked version of the app from one of the MANY places on the internet, add it to iTunes, sync, and you are done. NOTE: Surprisingly this is MUCH easier than actually buying it on iTunes!!
When the process for pirating an app is MUCH easier than buying it, people are more likely to pirate. I would bet that if it were MUCH easier to buy it on itunes, people would spend the 1.99 for the convenience of easy download.
There, Apple's fault. Are you happy?
Sure you can. In fact sometimes it helps to love a woman when you don't really know anything about her. Some of the biggest Patriot flag waving citizens of the US have no idea what is going on in current events. Often, the more you learn about something, the less enthralled you are with it. Hence the quote, "Familiarity breeds contempt."
that is, unless a court rules that Palm's actions were acceptable in this case, in which case they both violate a contract and do nothing unlawful. Just because you have a contract, doesn't mean that the contract itself isn't unlawful, like if I hire Paris Hilton to assassinate you. She gets the gun and shoots her foot off, and I go sue her for breach of contract for failing to off you. The judge gives me a rude gesture and say, "Sorry, your contract is illegal and thus, invalid.
It isn't about providing support for another company, its about not designing your product to prevent another company from interfacing with your marketplace. Itunes is a market, a digital mall. Imagine if Amazon.com suddenly started making computers with built in network cards. Then, they rewrite their website to make it difficult for any other brand of computer to interact with the marketplace because the manufacturer portion of the computer's MAC address doesn't match Amazon's.
Well, you could spoof the manufacturer portion of the MAC address, and your brand computer would communicate just fine with Amazon. But then you are a dick because you are "stealing" Amazon's identity.
Oh, let's make this Analogy a little more accurate. Amazon won't let competitor's computer view their website, but you "could" interact with Amazon.com using email and an ftp client. Your company could still communicate, but it's less convenient for the customer, who will probably say "Well, this computer and Amazon's computer work the same, but with and Amazon computer, it will be easier to use their website.
Same thing with Apple, sure you can interface with the itunes library, but its a lot easier if you own an ipod than if you own something else.
So? The government sees them as a monopoly. The government sees Microsoft as a monopoly too. This doesn't mean anything. I believe you are referring to anti-competitive trade practices by abusing monopoly power. The USB-IF can be a monopoly 24 hours a day for all the government cares. They won't stop that. But, forcing a federal trade commission ruling on these could end up with them saying, yup, its now federally mandated that you follow the USB-IF guidelines.
By spoofing a vendor-id, they are violating the USB standard, and the government isn't about to sit back and watch a nearly universal peripheral standard get broken. But it won't go this far, By insisting on standards for claiming USB compatibility, USB-IF is guaranteeing a positive competitive environment. It is no different than earning a "Certified for Windows Vista" sticker for you video card. You don't have to do it, but if you claim that label, you have to back it up. Palm claims USB 2.0 compatibility, and has to follow the standards as dictated by the USB-IF.
I dislike Apple, and I especially dislike itunes, and safari, as they tend to install themselves on computers. However, Palm can not be allowed to get away with using Apple's specific vendor ID. On the other hand, itunes, which is a common marketplace, placing many vendors and consumers together, shouldn't, in my opinion, be allowed to exclude non Apple products from interfacing with itunes in the same manner as Apple's products. It keeps the playing field nonlevel, which I believe is inherently anticompetitive.
And saying that well other brands can still access the songs, but they have to do it in a manner different from Apple products is like white people telling black people, "You can stay at the same hotel as us... but, you got to go in and out through the back entrance."
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah. Okay, tell ya what, why don't you go join the Marine Corps and tell me how that organization is full of geeks.
The Jocks hire the first one.
No people get picked on because they are bitches, and they will cave into the the bullies will. Being physically weak is only a part of it. Body, mind, spirit. You have to work on them all.
While it was wrong of the guy to accost you, in that situation you only have two options. You either kick him in the balls and accept that he is going to beat the crap out of you or two, you let him turn you into his bitch. With option one he is eventually going to get tired of trying to push you around and beat you down and move on to other prey.
With option two is is going to make life hell for you for your entire high school career.
It amazes me that people in large part chose option two.
God forbid that anything involving linux would be friendly to n00bs. Why that might make linux popular or something.
Okay, so lets look at this plan of yours to save money.
You are going to spend $300 on a low power webserver in order to save you seventy dollars per year on your electricity bill. You will still be spending approximately $30 per year on your new low powered webserver.
So, 300 + 30/yr after 7 years is 510 dollars
The savings of 70/yr after 7 years is 490 dollars.
After seven years of having a lower powered webserver, you will still be spending more money on your solution than on your problem. If you that concerned about saving money, you might just turn off your webserver.
Something wrong with your analogy is that these restaurants willingly gave you these free samples. Would these restaurants still willingly give you a free sample if you just walked in and forcefully took it?
The parent post didn't mention anything about forcefully stealing anything. The parent post said:
And the point was that you dont have demos in restaurants either, you only get to test it by purchasing.
My response was to point out that restaurants do give free samples voluntarily. I could also point out trade shows and expos where area restaurants show up as vendors and provide free samples of their menu to the thousands of potential customers that attend.
I can also go into my area supermarket on a Saturday and there will be people behind sample stations, trying to get me to test the newest brand condiment or microwave food or brand of cheese, or whatever they are pushing. These are also free samples or demos. We were talking about the presense or absence of demos, and the idea that try before you buy has validity in the marketplace.
In Texas, I can go buy a car. If I don't like it, I have three days in which I can drive back to the dealership and terminate my contract and give them the car back. I don't even lose any money on the deal.
In any loan contract in the United States, the law states a three day Right of Recission, during which the contract can be cancelled without penalty.
Even in a movie theater, a customer can walk out after the first 30 minutes or so and demand their money back. I remember quite a few parents demanding refunds after taking their children to Happy Feet with crying children in tow.
Why shouldn't consumers of software or games get to try before they buy? Why shouldn't consumers be able to demand their money back when a game is marketed as a great experience yet it blows chunks?
I disagree, the Cyberdyne suit is the early prototype for mass produced Guyver armor. And then the Ultimate Fighting Championship will be truly awesome to watch.
Hey the terminator robots took care of the elderly quite completely, thank you very much.
Oh, so they are the ones behind the Skynet virus!
I bet a robotic "reach around" would sell better though.
The game is 1.99 on Itunes. If it were easier to buy on Itunes than to pirate it, people wouldn't be pirating it as much. Perhaps the reason the piracy is so prevalent is that people find it easier to pirate than to purchase.
If you remember, people who had bought Spore were using pirated copies of it in order to avoid the machine crashing DRM that came bundled, or rather bungled, along with the game. In addition, there were new stories about the piracy increasing as a result of the inconvenient DRM issues.
When it is easier to pirate a game than buy it, what do you think people are going to do? Apple gets 30% of the gross from those games on the app store, so its their fault that the process of buying an app isn't easier than just pirating.
Sorry I missed your point, but again you are wrong, and probably aren't married either. When we went shopping for a baker for our wedding, we went to three different bakeries, and they all gave us free samples of cake so we could try them out.
We got four free meals in area restaurants because they wanted our business. Restaurants and bakeries and lots of other service oriented stores give demos. They aren't going to hedge on a 50 dollar meal when they could make several thousand dollars catering.
I have done exactly that. When my meal comes to me, if it doesn't taste good, I send it back and tell them to make something else. If they can't get it right the second time, I don't pay for it.
I remember at New Years Eve, 2000, my wife and I went out to a nice restaurant to celebrate, and we ordered a bottle of good champagne. We were given the taste, and it tasted like crap. So we sent back the bottle and got another one. The next bottle was heavenly. But we didn't pay for the first bottle.
We did pay for that second bottle though, since nine months later we had a son...
Excuse me?
You can argue that it is the right, morally responsible thing. The financially responsible thing is not to buy cheap games for your portable telephone.
When the process for pirating an app is MUCH easier than buying it, people are more likely to pirate. I would bet that if it were MUCH easier to buy it on itunes, people would spend the 1.99 for the convenience of easy download.
There, Apple's fault. Are you happy?
Depends, passion can be important to juries.
Yeah, wow. I haven't dealt with the TSR thing in a while. Now when I think about LOADHIGH, I am totally not talking about computers...
Where in Apple's marketing history do you see heterosexuality?
Accounting, huh? Tough break.
Sure you can. In fact sometimes it helps to love a woman when you don't really know anything about her. Some of the biggest Patriot flag waving citizens of the US have no idea what is going on in current events. Often, the more you learn about something, the less enthralled you are with it. Hence the quote, "Familiarity breeds contempt."
Is a catch 'em and hire 'em policy appropriate?
You are right, it is unlawful, and illegall......
that is, unless a court rules that Palm's actions were acceptable in this case, in which case they both violate a contract and do nothing unlawful. Just because you have a contract, doesn't mean that the contract itself isn't unlawful, like if I hire Paris Hilton to assassinate you. She gets the gun and shoots her foot off, and I go sue her for breach of contract for failing to off you. The judge gives me a rude gesture and say, "Sorry, your contract is illegal and thus, invalid.
It isn't about providing support for another company, its about not designing your product to prevent another company from interfacing with your marketplace. Itunes is a market, a digital mall. Imagine if Amazon.com suddenly started making computers with built in network cards. Then, they rewrite their website to make it difficult for any other brand of computer to interact with the marketplace because the manufacturer portion of the computer's MAC address doesn't match Amazon's.
Well, you could spoof the manufacturer portion of the MAC address, and your brand computer would communicate just fine with Amazon. But then you are a dick because you are "stealing" Amazon's identity.
Oh, let's make this Analogy a little more accurate. Amazon won't let competitor's computer view their website, but you "could" interact with Amazon.com using email and an ftp client. Your company could still communicate, but it's less convenient for the customer, who will probably say "Well, this computer and Amazon's computer work the same, but with and Amazon computer, it will be easier to use their website.
Same thing with Apple, sure you can interface with the itunes library, but its a lot easier if you own an ipod than if you own something else.
So? The government sees them as a monopoly. The government sees Microsoft as a monopoly too. This doesn't mean anything. I believe you are referring to anti-competitive trade practices by abusing monopoly power. The USB-IF can be a monopoly 24 hours a day for all the government cares. They won't stop that. But, forcing a federal trade commission ruling on these could end up with them saying, yup, its now federally mandated that you follow the USB-IF guidelines.
By spoofing a vendor-id, they are violating the USB standard, and the government isn't about to sit back and watch a nearly universal peripheral standard get broken. But it won't go this far, By insisting on standards for claiming USB compatibility, USB-IF is guaranteeing a positive competitive environment. It is no different than earning a "Certified for Windows Vista" sticker for you video card. You don't have to do it, but if you claim that label, you have to back it up. Palm claims USB 2.0 compatibility, and has to follow the standards as dictated by the USB-IF.
I dislike Apple, and I especially dislike itunes, and safari, as they tend to install themselves on computers. However, Palm can not be allowed to get away with using Apple's specific vendor ID. On the other hand, itunes, which is a common marketplace, placing many vendors and consumers together, shouldn't, in my opinion, be allowed to exclude non Apple products from interfacing with itunes in the same manner as Apple's products. It keeps the playing field nonlevel, which I believe is inherently anticompetitive.
And saying that well other brands can still access the songs, but they have to do it in a manner different from Apple products is like white people telling black people, "You can stay at the same hotel as us... but, you got to go in and out through the back entrance."
You work with the Republican leadership???