The HTML is from a different source because the guy just mirrored the Google page on his own site.
Why? Because oftentimes Google offers new features only to certain subnets. As that may indeed be the case here, which would explain why some but not all Slashdot users appear able to use this new feature, it only makes sense to offer a mirror or screenshot; otherwise, most people could not see this new feature.
And if the guy was trying to trick people into thinking his page was actually Google, he wouldn't have shuffled things over to Mirrordot.
From what I've read in other comments in this Slashpost, it's legit. The guy just posted a mirror of the results page on his website.
As was noted in a FPP earlier this week, Google often releases new features only to certain subnets before offering them in wide release. This may be one of those cases, which would explain why not everyone can view the images.
Or maybe, just maybe, it's REAL and he's mirroring the results page, because Google doesn't always unveil new features like this to everyone all at once. Oftentimes new features are released only to certain subnets before they are put into wide release.
If you know that your product may well have serious bugs like this, you shouldn't have sent out a press release promoting its launch, you shouldn't have given away free accounts to thousands of Blogger users, you shouldn't allow people to fire off a bunch of invitations to anyone they choose, and you should make some indication on the website (beyond "BETA," not everyone who uses Google reads Slashdot) that there can be risks associated with using it.
If Beta means "not ready for mass consumption," why is Google acting like it is? They announced GMail about nine months ago and received press coverage for it. They must have tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of users thanks to the ever-increasing number of free invites and accounts given to Blogger users. Correct me if I'm wrong, but other than the small "Beta" text under the Google logo, there's nothing on the GMail site to indicate to a user that there may be a risk involved with using it, and you can't reasonably expect people to know what "Beta" means, as you note in your post.
Maybe Beta SHOULD mean it's not ready for mass consumption, but Google's not acting like that. In fact, most of their services - Alerts, Catalogs, Froogle, Local, News, Scholar, Desktop Search - are in Beta, and are no more than a click or two away from the front page.
Yeah, maybe if you're U2. But most artists aren't exactly raking in the cash; either their money is sucked up by the label or they're not making enough to live the "good life" to start with.
Well, you don't have to be shakin' the thing up so bad it skips to benefit from a buffer on an HD player. It takes a lot of power to run the hard drive, so if you can spend a few seconds and dump 25 minutes of music to RAM and then park the drive, it's real good for battery life.
I imagine that most people who purchase a portable music device with a 40GB hard drive already have some music; why would they spend $10,000 on music instead of just, y'know, converting their songs to ATRAC 3... which according to The Register the upload software does automatically...
Assuming, of course, that you decide to dump all your songs to the player's RAM instead of the 20gig hard drive. Which would be pretty stupid, if you ask me.
I listen to 192kbps MP3s on my Rio Karma through my two year old Memorex-branded headphones that came with a long-gone twelve dollar CD player and it's still a moving experience.
I hate to break it to you, but you don't need thousands, or even hundreds of dollars of equipment to enjoy music. If you stress out listening to music from a fifty dollar boombox from Wal-Mart, you're probably more interested in absolute, utter perfection than just enjoying the goddamn music.
People enjoyed and were moved by music back in the 30s. Remember the 30s? Mono sound, crackly records, ridiculously lo-fi. Good equipment then is equipment you can't find in the dumpster today. But they got by. I wonder how - they didn't even have SACDs!
Make sure you "rough up" the bag a bit ahead of time (just throw it around against some rocks or something, or the pavement). Be sure to remove the laptop prior to this.
That would be a great idea. Delete everyone's emails... get rid of the account they've been giving to friends for months... I can't think of a reason they wouldn't do it!
Parks broke the law that she was protesting. That's civil disobedience. She DISOBEYED the law she was protesting, and did so in a CIVIL manner.
Let's look at our friends at Downhill Battle. They oppose the actions of the RIAA and its member companies. Yes, they disobeyed a law. Yes, it was civil. Problem is, the laws they broke (by defacing merchandise and in-store displays) have NOTHING TO DO with the actions they're protesting! What they did is pointless vandalism, NOT civil disobedience, and they deserve no praise for their actions.
Right now this is a cute tool, but it has the potential to become a powerful weapon to fight the major record label monopoly.
Give me a fecking break. The people at Downhill Battle have a history of vastly overstating the importance and relevance of their "accomplishments", and this is no different. Being able to browse iTunes over the Internet (something that won't last long once Apple hears about this) will do nothing to defeat the record companies. The amount of self-delusion that must go into a thought like that is startling.
While I'm on a rant, let me talk about something else that's been bothering me. Just what is it that Downhill Battle hopes to accomplish? One of their projects is showcased here. So, you guys buy a digital camera from Wal-Mart and then document yourselves vandalizing CDs, in-store displays, and music preview hardware (which, incidentally, has led me on more than one occasion to purchase indie-label music that I would not have found without the machines), and then fraudulently returned the camera. And this accomplished.... what? Far as I can tell, nothing beyond proving just how immature these guys are. Does Downhill Battle do anything of value, or is it all just lame anti-RIAA posturing?
From the Real.com homepage, it takes literally two clicks to begin the download of the free player. Anyone who's too damn stupid to take two seconds and read the page before complaining that it's hard to find the free player shouldn't be on the Internet in the first place.
Since when do April Fools Day jokes have to be funny for anyone other than those behind them? People never laugh when the sink sprays them with water in the morning...
Slashdot Mirror
Duped? Not necessarily.
The HTML is from a different source because the guy just mirrored the Google page on his own site.
Why? Because oftentimes Google offers new features only to certain subnets. As that may indeed be the case here, which would explain why some but not all Slashdot users appear able to use this new feature, it only makes sense to offer a mirror or screenshot; otherwise, most people could not see this new feature.
And if the guy was trying to trick people into thinking his page was actually Google, he wouldn't have shuffled things over to Mirrordot.
From what I've read in other comments in this Slashpost, it's legit. The guy just posted a mirror of the results page on his website.
As was noted in a FPP earlier this week, Google often releases new features only to certain subnets before offering them in wide release. This may be one of those cases, which would explain why not everyone can view the images.
Or maybe, just maybe, it's REAL and he's mirroring the results page, because Google doesn't always unveil new features like this to everyone all at once. Oftentimes new features are released only to certain subnets before they are put into wide release.
Calm down, man.
If you know that your product may well have serious bugs like this, you shouldn't have sent out a press release promoting its launch, you shouldn't have given away free accounts to thousands of Blogger users, you shouldn't allow people to fire off a bunch of invitations to anyone they choose, and you should make some indication on the website (beyond "BETA," not everyone who uses Google reads Slashdot) that there can be risks associated with using it.
If Beta means "not ready for mass consumption," why is Google acting like it is? They announced GMail about nine months ago and received press coverage for it. They must have tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of users thanks to the ever-increasing number of free invites and accounts given to Blogger users. Correct me if I'm wrong, but other than the small "Beta" text under the Google logo, there's nothing on the GMail site to indicate to a user that there may be a risk involved with using it, and you can't reasonably expect people to know what "Beta" means, as you note in your post.
Maybe Beta SHOULD mean it's not ready for mass consumption, but Google's not acting like that. In fact, most of their services - Alerts, Catalogs, Froogle, Local, News, Scholar, Desktop Search - are in Beta, and are no more than a click or two away from the front page.
Or you could switch all their channels to 1, and then take 6 or 11 for yourself.
artists are generally felt to live a good life
Yeah, maybe if you're U2. But most artists aren't exactly raking in the cash; either their money is sucked up by the label or they're not making enough to live the "good life" to start with.
Nope, no conflict on interest at all...
For better results, don't try running with a frickin' hard drive.
From link "MP3 performs really bad..."
Sounds like professional work.
Well, you don't have to be shakin' the thing up so bad it skips to benefit from a buffer on an HD player. It takes a lot of power to run the hard drive, so if you can spend a few seconds and dump 25 minutes of music to RAM and then park the drive, it's real good for battery life.
I imagine that most people who purchase a portable music device with a 40GB hard drive already have some music; why would they spend $10,000 on music instead of just, y'know, converting their songs to ATRAC 3... which according to The Register the upload software does automatically...
Assuming, of course, that you decide to dump all your songs to the player's RAM instead of the 20gig hard drive. Which would be pretty stupid, if you ask me.
"Painting" is made up of "gather painting supplies", "mask off window trim", etc.
;)
If you need a computer program to remind you how to paint...
I guess the FBI's new anti-piracy logo failed to terrify people into submission, as was hoped by record companies...
They seem to have confused acceptance with ignorance.
I listen to 192kbps MP3s on my Rio Karma through my two year old Memorex-branded headphones that came with a long-gone twelve dollar CD player and it's still a moving experience.
I hate to break it to you, but you don't need thousands, or even hundreds of dollars of equipment to enjoy music. If you stress out listening to music from a fifty dollar boombox from Wal-Mart, you're probably more interested in absolute, utter perfection than just enjoying the goddamn music.
People enjoyed and were moved by music back in the 30s. Remember the 30s? Mono sound, crackly records, ridiculously lo-fi. Good equipment then is equipment you can't find in the dumpster today. But they got by. I wonder how - they didn't even have SACDs!
Make sure you "rough up" the bag a bit ahead of time (just throw it around against some rocks or something, or the pavement).
Be sure to remove the laptop prior to this.
That would be a great idea. Delete everyone's emails... get rid of the account they've been giving to friends for months... I can't think of a reason they wouldn't do it!
Parks broke the law that she was protesting. That's civil disobedience. She DISOBEYED the law she was protesting, and did so in a CIVIL manner.
Let's look at our friends at Downhill Battle. They oppose the actions of the RIAA and its member companies. Yes, they disobeyed a law. Yes, it was civil. Problem is, the laws they broke (by defacing merchandise and in-store displays) have NOTHING TO DO with the actions they're protesting! What they did is pointless vandalism, NOT civil disobedience, and they deserve no praise for their actions.
Right now this is a cute tool, but it has the potential to become a powerful weapon to fight the major record label monopoly.
Give me a fecking break. The people at Downhill Battle have a history of vastly overstating the importance and relevance of their "accomplishments", and this is no different. Being able to browse iTunes over the Internet (something that won't last long once Apple hears about this) will do nothing to defeat the record companies. The amount of self-delusion that must go into a thought like that is startling.
While I'm on a rant, let me talk about something else that's been bothering me. Just what is it that Downhill Battle hopes to accomplish? One of their projects is showcased here. So, you guys buy a digital camera from Wal-Mart and then document yourselves vandalizing CDs, in-store displays, and music preview hardware (which, incidentally, has led me on more than one occasion to purchase indie-label music that I would not have found without the machines), and then fraudulently returned the camera. And this accomplished.... what? Far as I can tell, nothing beyond proving just how immature these guys are. Does Downhill Battle do anything of value, or is it all just lame anti-RIAA posturing?
From the Real.com homepage, it takes literally two clicks to begin the download of the free player. Anyone who's too damn stupid to take two seconds and read the page before complaining that it's hard to find the free player shouldn't be on the Internet in the first place.
You god damn fool. You can convert between AAC and MP3 without burning, assmonkey.
April Fools! Ha ha ha! ...eliminate about 2,500 retail jobs...
Oh.
Since when do April Fools Day jokes have to be funny for anyone other than those behind them? People never laugh when the sink sprays them with water in the morning...