Many parts of Betamx were modified by the passing of the DMCA. Some parts of the decision are still valid, but others aren't. The key, if I recall from my studies, is 'substantial non-infringing use' but don't quote me on that. The courts dont't follow Betamax where the DMCA preempts it.
I have the MX900 Bluetooth Mouse + an Apple Bluetooth keyboard.
I love them and wouldn't think of switching, and I bought them fairly recently so I know they are still available. No drivers for the MX900 for OSX, but it doesn't matter as I was able to map the buttons through System Preferences. But you need a Bluetooth adaptor as the logitech hub/cradle doesn't work with OSX (though it works fine for charging).
So far competition has been very good for satellite radio. Sirius dropped commericals from music channels, and XM followed them. Sirius put its music on the net for free, and XM also put theirs online for free (for some subscribers).
Add me to the list of people who want to see competition.
No, its not harsh.. well maybe the dying part - its a website, dude, calm down.
I don't like Flash intros and despise flash navigation and all the headaches it introduces. But explain how CSS makes Flash degrade gracefully? But newsflash - I don't decide what goes on the site. Multimillion dollar client wants crossfading images and flash navigation, my boss says ok. Then its my job to implement.
And maybe I'm not a competent web designer - but I am a more than competent coder who also knows how to spell competent.
Implement designs from a Fortune 500 website with hundreds of pages, with text embedded in graphics and with Flash integrated into both content and navigation and come back and tell us how that works.
And tell your boss it will take an extra X days and see how that goes over.
So arguing that the fact that parents with no time to parent are dumb enough to get knocked up multiple times should somehow affect my rights is pointless?
How does that work again?
I'm offended by rednecks driving stockcars. The people watching could be learning to do something useful besides being marketed to by logos at 200 mph. It an embarassment to intelligent people everywhere. It negatively affects me in my little world, because I would read a book but since I don't have the self-control to do that, I want it banned. I can't be bothered turning off my TV. So I say, ban it.
And what's with all the BTK hating? I mean, his victims are already dead, so whats the point in punishing him? It won't make them undead. his punishment is just a pointless exercise. We should jsut keep the knives away from him.
If you are too busy to properly supervise your children, think maybe you should take them sleighriding or to an art museum or to a library, rather than post on slashdot?
People make mistakes all the time. I don't make mistakes that result in affecting your life. So maybe you should consider not making mistakes (or 'miracles') that affect mine and learn some personal responsibility. Just because your life is other, it doesn't give you the right to end mine.
Sure, all you have to do is sit with your kids every minute that they are watching TV from the time they're born until their 18th birthday. No problem.
Here's an idea - don't like what you see on cable/sat and don't want to bother parenting the children you decided to have?
Don't shell out the $50 a month to get cable/sat and stop fucking whining.
i agree with you - the rest of my post was about how you *could* argue that those services are necessary functions of government. But under no circumstances could you rationally argue that WiFi is necessary. I'm not saying that the former should be state-provided. I'm saying that its a poor comparison.
I don't want to get into a huge debate over the issue of government helthcare - my point was that this response was completely off base:
There is a fundamental difference between providing something like Healthcare/Police/Fire services and Wireless Internet Access.
You can't compare free internet access to the above mentioned services, whether you are for or against them.
You can argue that we need those things provided by government. There is no argument that we need Wifi provided by government.
Can a person live without Police? Maybe. Healthcare? Maybe. Firefighters? Maybe. Wifi? Most certainly. That is a 'luxury.' If the poster is pro-socialism or communism, fine - make those arguments that the state should provide everything. But comparing those services is disingenuous.
I totally agree. I hope society decides that they want free cable tv. I don't have cable. I won't use it. But I want to pay for it for everyone else because society says I should.
You know, I can't even pretend anymore.
See of you need a fire department if your house burns down, or a cop when you are being robbed. Maybe we pay for those things because there might be a time when they will be required? If you can't see the difference between free WiFi and protection of life and property, you are just a moron.
Should we buy people WiFi cards too? And if they don't have a computer, should we buy them a PC as well?
They aren't trying to sell you a MacMini. - They are trying to sell you a G5.
If everything was expandable, you'd need a bigger case. There goes part of its appeals. Plus you increase the cost. So then what are you buying? A decent computer with a G4 processor for far more than an equivalent (from a hardware perspective) x86 machine. And they'd have people complaining, 'Why should I buy a Mini when I can get a G5 for only $xxx more?'
I don't think that the goal of the Mini was to make computer hobbyists happy. I would guess it was to sell a cheap Mac that worked well enough for most people, while preserving their high-end market for power users.
As far as I'm concerned, the public has spoken. They want internet access for all.
I want a free BMW! I have spoken. Upi there, government, provide it. Ans a new 220,500 sq ft. mansion on the Hudson. I want that too. In fact, we all want that. So give it to us. We have it coming to us because our system is 'for the people, by the people.'
You think he runs this country? Think again. This country is run by two parties - nothing else.
Well, this time that isn't really the case. There is a lot of power up for grabs this time (moreso than usual).
The next president willwill be nominating up to 3 conservative Supreme Court justices in the next term. Assuming the senate stays republican, a democratic president would have to nominate justices who are fairly moderate to get by a republican senate. If its republican senate and a republican president, you can add three more conservative justices to the Court now.
Plus the current issues that are being debated - Patriot Act, Gitmo rights, DMCA etc., are/will be handled by Ashcroft's (or his replacement's) minions. There was a story in the Times today about the DOJ ignoring the SC's Hamdi decision in its arguments to the Federal District Court on remand. There is some heavy stuff being debated and right now the government is being represented by ultraconservative Christians. If these cases come before an conservative court, the government will have a much easier time persuading them.
At least if there is a split, there will be something to limit and fragment power so that some moderate voices will be heard too.
Disclaimer: I am a registered Independent who would have voted for Badnarik if I didn't live in a battleground state.
Slashdot Mirror
Many parts of Betamx were modified by the passing of the DMCA. Some parts of the decision are still valid, but others aren't. The key, if I recall from my studies, is 'substantial non-infringing use' but don't quote me on that. The courts dont't follow Betamax where the DMCA preempts it.
I have the MX900 Bluetooth Mouse + an Apple Bluetooth keyboard.
I love them and wouldn't think of switching, and I bought them fairly recently so I know they are still available. No drivers for the MX900 for OSX, but it doesn't matter as I was able to map the buttons through System Preferences. But you need a Bluetooth adaptor as the logitech hub/cradle doesn't work with OSX (though it works fine for charging).
You are aware that when you buy a PS3, you don't need to throw your old console into the trash, right?
Why wasn't garreth cast?
So far competition has been very good for satellite radio. Sirius dropped commericals from music channels, and XM followed them. Sirius put its music on the net for free, and XM also put theirs online for free (for some subscribers).
Add me to the list of people who want to see competition.
Yes you can.
No, its not harsh .. well maybe the dying part - its a website, dude, calm down.
I don't like Flash intros and despise flash navigation and all the headaches it introduces. But explain how CSS makes Flash degrade gracefully? But newsflash - I don't decide what goes on the site. Multimillion dollar client wants crossfading images and flash navigation, my boss says ok. Then its my job to implement.
And maybe I'm not a competent web designer - but I am a more than competent coder who also knows how to spell competent.
I run the website for a local company
Implement designs from a Fortune 500 website with hundreds of pages, with text embedded in graphics and with Flash integrated into both content and navigation and come back and tell us how that works.
And tell your boss it will take an extra X days and see how that goes over.
If you need to have two parents working 11+ hours a day to provide for a family, you have NO business paying for cable or satellite.
So arguing that the fact that parents with no time to parent are dumb enough to get knocked up multiple times should somehow affect my rights is pointless?
How does that work again?
I'm offended by rednecks driving stockcars. The people watching could be learning to do something useful besides being marketed to by logos at 200 mph. It an embarassment to intelligent people everywhere. It negatively affects me in my little world, because I would read a book but since I don't have the self-control to do that, I want it banned. I can't be bothered turning off my TV. So I say, ban it.
And what's with all the BTK hating? I mean, his victims are already dead, so whats the point in punishing him? It won't make them undead. his punishment is just a pointless exercise. We should jsut keep the knives away from him.
If you are too busy to properly supervise your children, think maybe you should take them sleighriding or to an art museum or to a library, rather than post on slashdot?
People make mistakes all the time. I don't make mistakes that result in affecting your life. So maybe you should consider not making mistakes (or 'miracles') that affect mine and learn some personal responsibility. Just because your life is other, it doesn't give you the right to end mine.
I hope so. Then you can pass the laws outlawing jews. and gays. and gypsys.
We can pass all kinds of crazy laws!
Sure, all you have to do is sit with your kids every minute that they are watching TV from the time they're born until their 18th birthday. No problem.
Here's an idea - don't like what you see on cable/sat and don't want to bother parenting the children you decided to have?
Don't shell out the $50 a month to get cable/sat and stop fucking whining.
i agree with you - the rest of my post was about how you *could* argue that those services are necessary functions of government. But under no circumstances could you rationally argue that WiFi is necessary. I'm not saying that the former should be state-provided. I'm saying that its a poor comparison.
I don't want to get into a huge debate over the issue of government helthcare - my point was that this response was completely off base:
There is a fundamental difference between providing something like Healthcare/Police/Fire services and Wireless Internet Access.
You can't compare free internet access to the above mentioned services, whether you are for or against them.
You can argue that we need those things provided by government. There is no argument that we need Wifi provided by government.
Can a person live without Police? Maybe. Healthcare? Maybe. Firefighters? Maybe. Wifi? Most certainly. That is a 'luxury.' If the poster is pro-socialism or communism, fine - make those arguments that the state should provide everything. But comparing those services is disingenuous.
I totally agree. I hope society decides that they want free cable tv. I don't have cable. I won't use it. But I want to pay for it for everyone else because society says I should.
You know, I can't even pretend anymore.
See of you need a fire department if your house burns down, or a cop when you are being robbed. Maybe we pay for those things because there might be a time when they will be required? If you can't see the difference between free WiFi and protection of life and property, you are just a moron.
Should we buy people WiFi cards too? And if they don't have a computer, should we buy them a PC as well?
Or does anyone else think that Lucas should spice up Episode III with some breakdancing?
They aren't trying to sell you a MacMini. - They are trying to sell you a G5.
If everything was expandable, you'd need a bigger case. There goes part of its appeals. Plus you increase the cost. So then what are you buying? A decent computer with a G4 processor for far more than an equivalent (from a hardware perspective) x86 machine. And they'd have people complaining, 'Why should I buy a Mini when I can get a G5 for only $xxx more?'
I don't think that the goal of the Mini was to make computer hobbyists happy. I would guess it was to sell a cheap Mac that worked well enough for most people, while preserving their high-end market for power users.
$26.67
Yup. Violation of the Clayton Act. If it was for a loud-mouthed District Court judge, IE would be made by a completely seperate entity.
You can still view it on your DVD player. You just can't use DVDFile.com to do it for you.
As far as I'm concerned, the public has spoken. They want internet access for all.
I want a free BMW! I have spoken. Upi there, government, provide it. Ans a new 220,500 sq ft. mansion on the Hudson. I want that too. In fact, we all want that. So give it to us. We have it coming to us because our system is 'for the people, by the people.'
Yet you took the time to come in here, read the comments, and add nothing to the conversation. Kudos to you, superior non-watching TV man!
You think he runs this country? Think again. This country is run by two parties - nothing else.
Well, this time that isn't really the case. There is a lot of power up for grabs this time (moreso than usual).
The next president willwill be nominating up to 3 conservative Supreme Court justices in the next term. Assuming the senate stays republican, a democratic president would have to nominate justices who are fairly moderate to get by a republican senate. If its republican senate and a republican president, you can add three more conservative justices to the Court now.
Plus the current issues that are being debated - Patriot Act, Gitmo rights, DMCA etc., are/will be handled by Ashcroft's (or his replacement's) minions. There was a story in the Times today about the DOJ ignoring the SC's Hamdi decision in its arguments to the Federal District Court on remand. There is some heavy stuff being debated and right now the government is being represented by ultraconservative Christians. If these cases come before an conservative court, the government will have a much easier time persuading them.
At least if there is a split, there will be something to limit and fragment power so that some moderate voices will be heard too.
Disclaimer: I am a registered Independent who would have voted for Badnarik if I didn't live in a battleground state.
Too bad they removed my ability to send messages. Oh well, looks like its back to .05 for me.
Actually, if they were disparagin the product, its not slander or libel. Those are reserved for people. If its a product, its injurious falsehood.