I'm sorry, I really can't suss out what you're saying, or where it contradicts my point, assuming that it's even directed at me. Can you say it again more clearly?
Also, by parent, do you mean me, the grandparent (Miseph) your previous parent (Low Ranked Craig),...?
I am suggesting that a simultaneous lowering of price and availability in another large marketplace might offset the price reduction and even net him more revenue
Does not equal
Lower the price only in one store and keep the same price in the other
I see that you also accuse the GP of failing to comprehend what they read. Please check your irony meter before using the caps lock next time, or you may be denied capitalization service in the future.
Actually he said, to paraphrase, "I can imagine them wanting to watch something that would get them in trouble, I can forgive that. There are legitimate uses for bittorrent over tor."
He did not say "Circulate video through bittorrent/tor simply because it's a documentary" or anything like that. It's easy to misread him, but he went out of his way to say he wasn't supporting that.
I admit to being a slacker. I don't know whether or not I'm a "genius" of any kind, and in fact I doubt it, but I passed all of high school and a 4 year college (in 6 years, admittedly) doing virtually none of the homework assigned. I have a decent grasp on pretty much everything I set my mind to in spite of that, even just barely passing. Am I ready to jump into any number of careers that require some of the more arcane things they taught? No. But I'd probably put myself in the 60-80% range of understanding for a lot of it. I'm fairly sure that at one point in high school, I didn't study for a math class, was the first to finish the test, and also got 100.
If you as a school system have to work someone 1000% as hard as I worked--or more--to get them that remaining 20-40%, you are completely out of your fucking minds.
And I don't want to hear any teachers telling me how hard it is to teach kids. I'm not bashing the teachers. It's possible nobody in the world today has figured out a classroom environment / mass teaching paradigm that actually encourages 90-100% retention without inordinate amounts of work. More likely, whether anyone's figured it out or not, virtually nobody is trying to implement it, and instead they're all working using the methods passed down from previous years, decades, centuries.
I'll tell you what, though; I was always up to listen to things and up for getting hands-on with anything. Homework was something that for whatever reason totally freaked me out, so I didn't do it, but if you gave me something interesting to listen to, or something interesting to do, I was all over it. I'm sure there are plenty of others. "Study this because studies say studying will teach you things" is no replacement for teaching.
You and AC are more or less correct. You may recall that gravity acts as though it was a point source at the center of mass; the difference in distance from the center of the earth between you and the ISS is relatively small.
Google puts the radius of the earth at 6378 km, and Wikipedia puts the ISS orbit at about 340km (perigee / apogee in the sidebar, if you don't know the terms), which is only about a 5% increase. So if earth is 1 Gee (and it is), at ISS height you would get (1/1.05) Gees =.95 Gees, more or less.
In particular AC had it exactly right; it only seems like there's no weight because you're constantly falling; "weight" (not mass, as natehoy said) means force, every force has an opposite, and there's no force opposing you if you're in freefall, until you hit something.
If you knew it was stolen, took it apart, took pictures of it, and tried to profit off having acquired that admittedly stolen good (as a media business, getting clicks from pics IS profiting), then yes. Even if this wasn't explicitly covered in the law, and the many posters here make clear that it is (I don't live in Cali so I dunno personally), you are still being extremely skeezy in your business.
Apple isn't the only corporation with prototypes they wouldn't want to admit they have, and it's not just corporations that want to keep secrets. If it was a teen's diary, which was left on the street, found, the juicy bits were reproduced publicly, and then when s/he finally asks for it back, it's "graciously" returned, that's still something only a real dick would do.
If I were even approached by someone fencing the 4G, I would turn it down, then report the fact that he's fencing it to the authorities--even if I don't know his name, the company would want to know it's on the street. Deciding to instead potentially damage the property, and profit by the whole endeavor, is sleazy.
"The end" as a historical note, that is, looking back on it, is a point in time.
When people see (or believe they see) that "the end" or something is coming, they generally want to comment on it before it happens, as opposed to just looking back sadly and seeing that it's already gone. They will, obviously, use "the end" to describe it, because that's what they are commenting on. If it isn't really quite over yet, for whatever reason, these stories can drag on over months, years, or in this case, decades.
Your shallow use of grammar does not mean that the article title was at all unclear. Without seeing the summary, much less the arcticle, I knew from the title that there was another story about how 3.5" disks are still dying, had not fully disappeared, but that another milestone had come in its demise and/or that someone had just made some sort of commentary on it, something of that sort.
Competition law, known in the United States as antitrust law, are laws that promote or maintain market competition by regulating anti-competitive conduct.
"Anti-competitive" means "We will stop you if you try to compete," not "Sure, go ahead and compete, and oh gee, looks like we're still winning. Well, good luck!" Google does not stop you from trying to compete (there are other alternatives for every single thing they do--search, ads, phone OS, email, EVERYTHING). They are not, to my knowledge, gutting legitimate businesses with underhanded tactics, throwing their weight around, slandering competitors (like, you know, accusing them of anti-competitive conduct when none exists), etc.
Frankly the lawmen involved should take a more careful look at the people asking for these probes, especially if they turn out to not be backed up by facts.
If such a study is required in order to verify or debunk the results the article claims to already have, yes. That's what science is, journalism be damned.
Well, maybe if the idealistic fools are on the board of large corporations, that would change
Ah, more idealism:)
If these idealistic fools were on the boards of large corporations, those corporations would shortly find their profit margins disappearing, their stock plummeting, and their shareholders knocking on the door brandishing torches and pitchforks. Idealism can't compete with economics.
I'm pretty sure all you're saying is, "If you fuck with a business without knowing anything about economics, it will collapse."
I don't see what that could possibly have to do with idealism.
I considered saying something like that (as a random comment, not insinuation) but it seemed a bit mean-spirited, and I didn't want to take away from what I was already saying.
Right. I mean, given how tightly Apple controls these things, it's not like they don't already know who lost it. Poor SOB probably had to face his superior before news got out that it had been leaked, and if he didn't, he wouldn't have survived any decent effort to find out which unit was missing.
If anything, this just means Apple can't obliterate his career without anyone else knowing why....not to say they'd do that, or not, I dunno.
I'm already considering it. I don't know where to go or what to do elsewhere around the world, but a lot of things happening in the first world really do seem like they're building up towards some kind of poorly thought out (IE, tyrannical) government/business scheme that could just really wreck life for those who live here, at least in certain ways.
Whether or not I can actually do this depends on what kind of opportunities I have, among other things--I'm not desperate to leave, so yeah, you could win that bet. But I'm not babbling about it in a "pay attention to meeeee" gambit either.
"Should be shot?" Over that, dude you guys need to get some bigger priorities if you want to shoot them over not getting your movies/music. Get over it, move on and stop trying to push your 'open source/free' agenda.
Actually, I'm specifically suggesting that people who try to create tyranny be shot.
You know, people like those who want to bankrupt random citizens using the legal system, because they were--willingly or not, or knowingly or not--sharing entertainment without paying for it. You remember the legal system, right? The one that's supposed to make sure nobody can do bad things? Yeah, that one.
Or we could just leave any nation stupid enough to pass laws like that.
It's not like those countries need us for taxes or anything, right? I mean, they have all those rich people. Rich people have to pay the greatest share of the taxes anyway, right? Right? Because that's the only sane way to do it. So all the decent human beings who are tired of being treated like they are somehow lower class leaving shouldn't have any effect at all. And since those rich people have so much money, I'm sure they can just pay people in other nations to do all the work anyway without those workers living under the stupid laws they don't accept but never had agency to change.
Seriously, now.
I've said this before. RIAA == ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRY. E-N-T-E-R-T-A-I-N. You do not have the authority as an entertainment organization to fuck up millions of peoples lives. The government is tasked with law enforcement, military defense, et al, and they STILL don't have the authority to be tyrannical dickheads. They try, lord do they try sometimes, and hell, sometimes they manage, but they do not have the authority.
xxAA should not be thinking they've found a loophole in that system. If they are thinking they have a loophole, they should be shot, along with anyone in the government who is enabling them to do so.
Also, someone needs to stand up and tell people to stop developing these browser based applications.
Don't be obtuse. I defend your right to express yourself through writing browser-based applications, but I have the right to criticise your expression.
It would be polite to recall that people are generally 'expressing themselves' not out of obstinacy, but because they really do have a problem, and those apps really do solve it. It doesn't have to be a problem of world-shattering import; "Oh god, not the clicking next five times again, if I do this one more time, I'm going to be eaten by the alien hive-lord and Earth will be invaded!" They can instead be, "God, I'm so fucking tired of dealing with licenses, network issues, making sure that everyone is using the same copy of a document, trying to get access when I don't have a laptop configured for the company VPN, etc, usw, and oh hey, you can just use a web browser? Well hell, we should at least look into this."
If you, yes you, end up using a program, even an office program, that just doesn't work given your choice of platforms, or because of some other stupid decision by the developers, but you have net access, even you, troll that you are, will say, "What the hell, even Google Docs has THIS stupid problem figured out. Why can't these guys?" However, it isn't "even Google Docs." It's Google Docs because service based economies aren't just about doing things slightly better than the next guy--they're about being right there if the customer needs something, no ifs, ands, or buts, and that's virtually (hah) what the web is for.
I'm not uncomfortable around homosexuals in social settings. But the thought of guy-on-guy is pretty yucky to me. Does that make me a homophobe?
I would say it makes you insecure. The crap in your toilet is yucky too, but are you going to die and give up if it clogs and nobody else is around to unplug it?
That yucky feeling is basically "I don't know how to handle it." Well, you handle it by saying, "No." And anyone who doesn't respect that you said "No" is a rapist, which will probably be a very bad thing for you whether they're a man or a woman, if only because they're likely to use violence, be cruel, or steal from you.
Hey man, talk to the people who wrote/submitted the article, not me. I don't claim to have facts, I just interpret what people probably mean by the claims to facts they seem to have according to the summary.
I did use Weave for a while, but since I was literally not sure whether I would still be using the same computer in a week or two, not having to install an extension to get to my bookmarks was a major plus.
I used Adblock+ on FF for a long time, but I never got around to trying to use NoScript because it made me nervous; I never know what possible legitimate uses of scripts would be blocked nor how I'd know. I suppose it's rather naive, but I just don't want to have to mess with it.
Slashdot Mirror
Right, that's what I thought Miseph was saying.
Except that I don't think LRC fails to understand, and was pointing out there's no evidence of such despite Miseph's rant.
I guess in the end I was just a squabble over language. Sorry.
So before you can put flash on your flash, you have to flash your flash? Or is flash not put on the flash?
I'm sorry, I really can't suss out what you're saying, or where it contradicts my point, assuming that it's even directed at me. Can you say it again more clearly?
Also, by parent, do you mean me, the grandparent (Miseph) your previous parent (Low Ranked Craig), ...?
I am suggesting that a simultaneous lowering of price and availability in another large marketplace might offset the price reduction and even net him more revenue
Does not equal
Lower the price only in one store and keep the same price in the other
I see that you also accuse the GP of failing to comprehend what they read. Please check your irony meter before using the caps lock next time, or you may be denied capitalization service in the future.
Actually he said, to paraphrase, "I can imagine them wanting to watch something that would get them in trouble, I can forgive that. There are legitimate uses for bittorrent over tor."
He did not say "Circulate video through bittorrent/tor simply because it's a documentary" or anything like that. It's easy to misread him, but he went out of his way to say he wasn't supporting that.
Now this doesn't make a lick of sense to me.
I admit to being a slacker. I don't know whether or not I'm a "genius" of any kind, and in fact I doubt it, but I passed all of high school and a 4 year college (in 6 years, admittedly) doing virtually none of the homework assigned. I have a decent grasp on pretty much everything I set my mind to in spite of that, even just barely passing. Am I ready to jump into any number of careers that require some of the more arcane things they taught? No. But I'd probably put myself in the 60-80% range of understanding for a lot of it. I'm fairly sure that at one point in high school, I didn't study for a math class, was the first to finish the test, and also got 100.
If you as a school system have to work someone 1000% as hard as I worked--or more--to get them that remaining 20-40%, you are completely out of your fucking minds.
And I don't want to hear any teachers telling me how hard it is to teach kids. I'm not bashing the teachers. It's possible nobody in the world today has figured out a classroom environment / mass teaching paradigm that actually encourages 90-100% retention without inordinate amounts of work. More likely, whether anyone's figured it out or not, virtually nobody is trying to implement it, and instead they're all working using the methods passed down from previous years, decades, centuries.
I'll tell you what, though; I was always up to listen to things and up for getting hands-on with anything. Homework was something that for whatever reason totally freaked me out, so I didn't do it, but if you gave me something interesting to listen to, or something interesting to do, I was all over it. I'm sure there are plenty of others. "Study this because studies say studying will teach you things" is no replacement for teaching.
End rant before I go in circles again.
You and AC are more or less correct. You may recall that gravity acts as though it was a point source at the center of mass; the difference in distance from the center of the earth between you and the ISS is relatively small.
Google puts the radius of the earth at 6378 km, and Wikipedia puts the ISS orbit at about 340km (perigee / apogee in the sidebar, if you don't know the terms), which is only about a 5% increase. So if earth is 1 Gee (and it is), at ISS height you would get (1/1.05) Gees = .95 Gees, more or less.
In particular AC had it exactly right; it only seems like there's no weight because you're constantly falling; "weight" (not mass, as natehoy said) means force, every force has an opposite, and there's no force opposing you if you're in freefall, until you hit something.
If you knew it was stolen, took it apart, took pictures of it, and tried to profit off having acquired that admittedly stolen good (as a media business, getting clicks from pics IS profiting), then yes. Even if this wasn't explicitly covered in the law, and the many posters here make clear that it is (I don't live in Cali so I dunno personally), you are still being extremely skeezy in your business.
Apple isn't the only corporation with prototypes they wouldn't want to admit they have, and it's not just corporations that want to keep secrets. If it was a teen's diary, which was left on the street, found, the juicy bits were reproduced publicly, and then when s/he finally asks for it back, it's "graciously" returned, that's still something only a real dick would do.
If I were even approached by someone fencing the 4G, I would turn it down, then report the fact that he's fencing it to the authorities--even if I don't know his name, the company would want to know it's on the street. Deciding to instead potentially damage the property, and profit by the whole endeavor, is sleazy.
You're being stupid.
"The end" as a historical note, that is, looking back on it, is a point in time.
When people see (or believe they see) that "the end" or something is coming, they generally want to comment on it before it happens, as opposed to just looking back sadly and seeing that it's already gone. They will, obviously, use "the end" to describe it, because that's what they are commenting on. If it isn't really quite over yet, for whatever reason, these stories can drag on over months, years, or in this case, decades.
Your shallow use of grammar does not mean that the article title was at all unclear. Without seeing the summary, much less the arcticle, I knew from the title that there was another story about how 3.5" disks are still dying, had not fully disappeared, but that another milestone had come in its demise and/or that someone had just made some sort of commentary on it, something of that sort.
Ubisoft has brought this upon themselves
Brought what upon themselves?
Are you trying to say games with more permissive DRM have NOT been cracked? Or that games without DRM haven't been stolen?
Competition law, known in the United States as antitrust law, are laws that promote or maintain market competition by regulating anti-competitive conduct.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antitrust
"Anti-competitive" means "We will stop you if you try to compete," not "Sure, go ahead and compete, and oh gee, looks like we're still winning. Well, good luck!" Google does not stop you from trying to compete (there are other alternatives for every single thing they do--search, ads, phone OS, email, EVERYTHING). They are not, to my knowledge, gutting legitimate businesses with underhanded tactics, throwing their weight around, slandering competitors (like, you know, accusing them of anti-competitive conduct when none exists), etc.
Frankly the lawmen involved should take a more careful look at the people asking for these probes, especially if they turn out to not be backed up by facts.
If such a study is required in order to verify or debunk the results the article claims to already have, yes. That's what science is, journalism be damned.
So have it on my desk by Monday, OK?
No, no, in Soviet Russia, the chip implants YOU into the GOVERNMENT.
Well, maybe if the idealistic fools are on the board of large corporations, that would change
Ah, more idealism :)
If these idealistic fools were on the boards of large corporations, those corporations would shortly find their profit margins disappearing, their stock plummeting, and their shareholders knocking on the door brandishing torches and pitchforks. Idealism can't compete with economics.
I'm pretty sure all you're saying is, "If you fuck with a business without knowing anything about economics, it will collapse."
I don't see what that could possibly have to do with idealism.
Or just patting his pockets, "No, I know I have it here somewhere..."
I considered saying something like that (as a random comment, not insinuation) but it seemed a bit mean-spirited, and I didn't want to take away from what I was already saying.
Right. I mean, given how tightly Apple controls these things, it's not like they don't already know who lost it. Poor SOB probably had to face his superior before news got out that it had been leaked, and if he didn't, he wouldn't have survived any decent effort to find out which unit was missing.
If anything, this just means Apple can't obliterate his career without anyone else knowing why. ...not to say they'd do that, or not, I dunno.
I'm already considering it. I don't know where to go or what to do elsewhere around the world, but a lot of things happening in the first world really do seem like they're building up towards some kind of poorly thought out (IE, tyrannical) government/business scheme that could just really wreck life for those who live here, at least in certain ways.
Whether or not I can actually do this depends on what kind of opportunities I have, among other things--I'm not desperate to leave, so yeah, you could win that bet. But I'm not babbling about it in a "pay attention to meeeee" gambit either.
"Should be shot?"
Over that, dude you guys need to get some bigger priorities if you want to shoot them over not getting your movies/music. Get over it, move on and stop trying to push your 'open source/free' agenda.
Actually, I'm specifically suggesting that people who try to create tyranny be shot.
You know, people like those who want to bankrupt random citizens using the legal system, because they were--willingly or not, or knowingly or not--sharing entertainment without paying for it. You remember the legal system, right? The one that's supposed to make sure nobody can do bad things? Yeah, that one.
Or we could just leave any nation stupid enough to pass laws like that.
It's not like those countries need us for taxes or anything, right? I mean, they have all those rich people. Rich people have to pay the greatest share of the taxes anyway, right? Right? Because that's the only sane way to do it. So all the decent human beings who are tired of being treated like they are somehow lower class leaving shouldn't have any effect at all. And since those rich people have so much money, I'm sure they can just pay people in other nations to do all the work anyway without those workers living under the stupid laws they don't accept but never had agency to change.
Seriously, now.
I've said this before. RIAA == ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRY. E-N-T-E-R-T-A-I-N. You do not have the authority as an entertainment organization to fuck up millions of peoples lives. The government is tasked with law enforcement, military defense, et al, and they STILL don't have the authority to be tyrannical dickheads. They try, lord do they try sometimes, and hell, sometimes they manage, but they do not have the authority.
xxAA should not be thinking they've found a loophole in that system. If they are thinking they have a loophole, they should be shot, along with anyone in the government who is enabling them to do so.
Also, someone needs to stand up and tell people to stop developing these browser based applications.
Don't be obtuse. I defend your right to express yourself through writing browser-based applications, but I have the right to criticise your expression.
It would be polite to recall that people are generally 'expressing themselves' not out of obstinacy, but because they really do have a problem, and those apps really do solve it. It doesn't have to be a problem of world-shattering import; "Oh god, not the clicking next five times again, if I do this one more time, I'm going to be eaten by the alien hive-lord and Earth will be invaded!" They can instead be, "God, I'm so fucking tired of dealing with licenses, network issues, making sure that everyone is using the same copy of a document, trying to get access when I don't have a laptop configured for the company VPN, etc, usw, and oh hey, you can just use a web browser? Well hell, we should at least look into this."
If you, yes you, end up using a program, even an office program, that just doesn't work given your choice of platforms, or because of some other stupid decision by the developers, but you have net access, even you, troll that you are, will say, "What the hell, even Google Docs has THIS stupid problem figured out. Why can't these guys?" However, it isn't "even Google Docs." It's Google Docs because service based economies aren't just about doing things slightly better than the next guy--they're about being right there if the customer needs something, no ifs, ands, or buts, and that's virtually (hah) what the web is for.
I'm not uncomfortable around homosexuals in social settings. But the thought of guy-on-guy is pretty yucky to me. Does that make me a homophobe?
I would say it makes you insecure. The crap in your toilet is yucky too, but are you going to die and give up if it clogs and nobody else is around to unplug it?
That yucky feeling is basically "I don't know how to handle it." Well, you handle it by saying, "No." And anyone who doesn't respect that you said "No" is a rapist, which will probably be a very bad thing for you whether they're a man or a woman, if only because they're likely to use violence, be cruel, or steal from you.
Hey man, talk to the people who wrote/submitted the article, not me. I don't claim to have facts, I just interpret what people probably mean by the claims to facts they seem to have according to the summary.
I'm just waiting for someone to
[_] Enable evil in the world
I don't even know why that was compiled in, much less on by default.
I did use Weave for a while, but since I was literally not sure whether I would still be using the same computer in a week or two, not having to install an extension to get to my bookmarks was a major plus.
I used Adblock+ on FF for a long time, but I never got around to trying to use NoScript because it made me nervous; I never know what possible legitimate uses of scripts would be blocked nor how I'd know. I suppose it's rather naive, but I just don't want to have to mess with it.