if this is true, why is the technology used in the mac becoming ever more like that used in the wintel world [ram, ide, usb, etc].
You seem to confuse invention with innovation. Using the latest standard of PCI or DDR does not make you an innovator, coming out with stuff like the Mac Cube and the iPod does.
I mean, just because apple comes out with a small footprint box, that means that nobody else is allowed to do it?
With what looks to be the exact same color and form factor?
Perhaps we should be looking at who apple took the idea from instead of immediatly jumping on others because they released one around the same time apple did.
Two words: Mac Cube. Now how about a nice, warm cup of stfu?
Forgive me for saying so, but it all screams of the standard apple zealotry I've come to expect.
The studio alone -- I'm talking about just the room here -- will cost $100,000 to build.
If you're paying Brooklyn Bridge prices, sure. But once the studio is built, it's built - and it is ridiculous to charge every band a hundered grand to use the damn thing.
you're assuming that the record company has already recovered its costs. This is practically never true. The only reason the record companies are able to stay in business at all is because a small number of blockbuster artists make them a fortune, which subsidizes all the music they sell that never breaks even.
Bullshit. Most of the costs are absorbed by the artist, not the label. This is how acts like Toni Braxton and TLC earn their lables over $150 million apiece and yet end up declaring bankruptcy.
Problem is that most albums do not recoup production and promotion costs.
I call bull. The movie industry has the exact same sob story as the record industry, probably for the exact same reason: so they can avoid paying royalties.
Opposing the depredations of feminism does not make you "right wing". Go find a single statement from Glenn's columns or radio show that could honestly be considering "right wing". You seem to be thinking of these guys, but those guys are not Glenn.
I recommend that you start looking at reputable sources like the Census Bureau
The sources he sites are the U.S. Deptartment of Labor and the International Labor Organization, run by the U.N., not some right wing think tank. RTFA and then STFU.
Men get paid more because they work more, and in more dangerous situations, not because of any sexism. Deal with it.
Bill, before offering half baked solutions to the "education problem" try to think of one that takes all of these people into consideration.
But you can't have one school that works for everyone. You'd have to have two different kinds of high schools - a vocational one and a prep school. Other countries do this all the time, maybe the U.S. should give it a try.
Most males are pigs, and by the time a girl is 14 (if she's not physically hideous) she's already learned what men are interested in, by and large: getting their poles slicked, one way or the other.
Wow, well as long as we're being sexist, all girls are shallow bitches who want to slick poles while aspiring to be gold diggers once they hit 18. Or do you care to revise your bullshit generalization?
Girls do not 'grow out' of what's become ingrained by the time they're 15, they're obsessed with being popular, having perfect hair and great make-up, and the best clothes - through adulthood.
Baloney. If you think boys who are successful academically are the toast of the town, I have some beachfront property in Montana to sell you. In high school, a boy's popularity is a combination of these three areas: sports, sports and sports.
Look - my SO is a college professor
Is that so, eh? Why don't you ask your SO college professor what the enrollment gap between men and women is at that college? What about the rates of graduation versus dropping out?
In almost any work environment that's 80 percent male, women are harassed and looked on
You're going to be harrased in any work environment if 80% of the people are different from you. Duh. The same is true for men. But of course when the guy is getting the short end of the stick, "that's the way it is", but if it happens to a woman, then it's discrimination.
Guys have never been blamed for their own behaviour,
Bullshit. Go ask those criminals you mentioned how well the "TV made me do it" defence worked in court.
Incidentally, women precisely are programmed to want an emotional, nurturing man.
No, they are programmed to want successful guys who are cavemen in bed. The emotional, nurturing ones you speak off get dumped by the woman before the 3rd date.
n the UK, women are known to get lower wages for precisely the same jobs. 23% lower, in fact.
More bullshit. Woman get paid less because they work less than men. Period. Fewer hours worked per week, less expereince on the job, less likely to take high paying but extremely dangerous work.
and a coordinator for my university's Women in Computer Science initiative
Question: does your university have an initiative for men with education majors? If your university is also a medical school, does it have an initiative for male nurses?
The "girl empowerment" train got rolling about fifteen years ago with a bogus study claiming that girls were falling behind boys, when ironically girls were just starting to surpass boys at the time. Now that girls are graduating from high school and college in much higher numbers, and many colleges have a 10% or more difference in enrollment between men and women, you'd think the pendulum would start to swing back and efforts would be made to address the disparity. Nope! Girls haven't taken over math and science yet, they must need more empowering!
That "scandal" reminded me of the time the sports press were brutally castigating Randy Moss for leaving a football game before it was over. If you don't watch football, Moss is a reciever for the Vikings. Anyway, judging by the number of sports reporters calling him a jackass, you'd think he had left the game 10 minutes early, when actually there were 2 seconds left when he walked off the field.
The only jackasses were the sports press for making a big deal out of nothing, and the only idiots in the Summers case are those who are making a big deal out of...nothing. Summers made a simple off the cuff hypothetical responce to a question, and he might be right reguardless.
Which would be fine if the subject under discussion were the DMCA, as that was a whoreoff between the Hollywood Democrats and the big business Republicans. But the DMCA doesn't have anything to do with the current flap over "indecency" fines.
presenting it this way is honest. after all, these two ideas are simply that... ideas.
Um, no. You're throwing details away to try and reach some kind of equivilancy between religion and science when none such exists. Science is all about observing and quantifying, and religion is about speaking out of your ass to explain things you don't understand. Yes, sometimes science gets it wrong, and a hundered years from now scientists will be laughing at how we came to such silly conclusions to some of our observations, but science also gets it right much of the time. Whereas nothing dealing with religion can be provably right, because it's all based around unobservable, unquantifiable forces.
Religion is valuable due to its historical and cultural aspects, but it has no place in any rational effort to explain how the universe works.
Slashdot Mirror
small computers aren't new guys!!
Right, Apple came out with one back in 2000. Don't feel so clever now, eh?
Did Apple innovate the small form factor computer? No.
Yes, they did.
Did Apple innovate the harddisk based MP3 player? No.
Yes, they did. They had a large capacity in a tiny size with faster transfer rates. That is the definition of innovation.
Did Apple innovate the all-in-one computer? No.
Did anyone say they did? No.
Do you not have a damn clue as to the difference between invention and innovation? Yes.
And here's the proof. Not to mention that the Mini is a lot smaller than the smallest Shuttle.
If anything the Mac G4 Cube and Mac Mini could be accused of being knockoffs of the Qube.
Considering that Jobs worked at Next which was famous for its Cube, I'd say you're full of it on that one.
Apple wasn't the first wtih a Mini.
You sure about that?
Sorry, Apple copied the PC when it comes to mini personal computers
Sorry, you're completely wrong, what a surprise.
And didn't Apple copy their stuff from Xerox PARC research to an astounding extent?
This turd was put to rest so long ago its not even funny anymore. Xerox got paid. Deal with it.
Don't feel so clever, now do you?
That would be fairly retarded of them, as the Mac Cube came after Jobs return, and Jobs had previously made a cube at Next.
if this is true, why is the technology used in the mac becoming ever more like that used in the wintel world [ram, ide, usb, etc].
You seem to confuse invention with innovation. Using the latest standard of PCI or DDR does not make you an innovator, coming out with stuff like the Mac Cube and the iPod does.
I mean, just because apple comes out with a small footprint box, that means that nobody else is allowed to do it?
With what looks to be the exact same color and form factor?
Perhaps we should be looking at who apple took the idea from instead of immediatly jumping on others because they released one around the same time apple did.
Two words: Mac Cube. Now how about a nice, warm cup of stfu?
Forgive me for saying so, but it all screams of the standard apple zealotry I've come to expect.
And you're an anti-Apple zealot. Whoop de do.
The studio alone -- I'm talking about just the room here -- will cost $100,000 to build.
If you're paying Brooklyn Bridge prices, sure. But once the studio is built, it's built - and it is ridiculous to charge every band a hundered grand to use the damn thing.
you're assuming that the record company has already recovered its costs. This is practically never true. The only reason the record companies are able to stay in business at all is because a small number of blockbuster artists make them a fortune, which subsidizes all the music they sell that never breaks even.
Bullshit. Most of the costs are absorbed by the artist, not the label. This is how acts like Toni Braxton and TLC earn their lables over $150 million apiece and yet end up declaring bankruptcy.
Problem is that most albums do not recoup production and promotion costs.
I call bull. The movie industry has the exact same sob story as the record industry, probably for the exact same reason: so they can avoid paying royalties.
Despite what some right-wing
Opposing the depredations of feminism does not make you "right wing". Go find a single statement from Glenn's columns or radio show that could honestly be considering "right wing". You seem to be thinking of these guys, but those guys are not Glenn.
I recommend that you start looking at reputable sources like the Census Bureau
The sources he sites are the U.S. Deptartment of Labor and the International Labor Organization, run by the U.N., not some right wing think tank. RTFA and then STFU.
Men get paid more because they work more, and in more dangerous situations, not because of any sexism. Deal with it.
It's simpler than that. Women will accept a lower salary to do the same job.
No, they get paid less because they work less.
Bill, before offering half baked solutions to the "education problem" try to think of one that takes all of these people into consideration.
But you can't have one school that works for everyone. You'd have to have two different kinds of high schools - a vocational one and a prep school. Other countries do this all the time, maybe the U.S. should give it a try.
Most males are pigs, and by the time a girl is 14 (if she's not physically hideous) she's already learned what men are interested in, by and large: getting their poles slicked, one way or the other.
Wow, well as long as we're being sexist, all girls are shallow bitches who want to slick poles while aspiring to be gold diggers once they hit 18. Or do you care to revise your bullshit generalization?
Girls do not 'grow out' of what's become ingrained by the time they're 15, they're obsessed with being popular, having perfect hair and great make-up, and the best clothes - through adulthood.
Baloney. If you think boys who are successful academically are the toast of the town, I have some beachfront property in Montana to sell you. In high school, a boy's popularity is a combination of these three areas: sports, sports and sports.
Look - my SO is a college professor
Is that so, eh? Why don't you ask your SO college professor what the enrollment gap between men and women is at that college? What about the rates of graduation versus dropping out?
In almost any work environment that's 80 percent male, women are harassed and looked on
You're going to be harrased in any work environment if 80% of the people are different from you. Duh. The same is true for men. But of course when the guy is getting the short end of the stick, "that's the way it is", but if it happens to a woman, then it's discrimination.
Guys have never been blamed for their own behaviour,
Bullshit. Go ask those criminals you mentioned how well the "TV made me do it" defence worked in court.
Incidentally, women precisely are programmed to want an emotional, nurturing man.
No, they are programmed to want successful guys who are cavemen in bed. The emotional, nurturing ones you speak off get dumped by the woman before the 3rd date.
n the UK, women are known to get lower wages for precisely the same jobs. 23% lower, in fact.
More bullshit. Woman get paid less because they work less than men. Period. Fewer hours worked per week, less expereince on the job, less likely to take high paying but extremely dangerous work.
Funny, but that old chesnut's a lie.
and a coordinator for my university's Women in Computer Science initiative
Question: does your university have an initiative for men with education majors? If your university is also a medical school, does it have an initiative for male nurses?
The "girl empowerment" train got rolling about fifteen years ago with a bogus study claiming that girls were falling behind boys, when ironically girls were just starting to surpass boys at the time. Now that girls are graduating from high school and college in much higher numbers, and many colleges have a 10% or more difference in enrollment between men and women, you'd think the pendulum would start to swing back and efforts would be made to address the disparity. Nope! Girls haven't taken over math and science yet, they must need more empowering!
Only an idiot like Larry Summers
That "scandal" reminded me of the time the sports press were brutally castigating Randy Moss for leaving a football game before it was over. If you don't watch football, Moss is a reciever for the Vikings. Anyway, judging by the number of sports reporters calling him a jackass, you'd think he had left the game 10 minutes early, when actually there were 2 seconds left when he walked off the field.
The only jackasses were the sports press for making a big deal out of nothing, and the only idiots in the Summers case are those who are making a big deal out of...nothing. Summers made a simple off the cuff hypothetical responce to a question, and he might be right reguardless.
Just draw attention to the fact that "the other circumcision" is also not a good thing.
:)
Yup. Sort of like the article that bemoaned how half of all AIDS victums in Africa were women...well who do they think the other half are?
Flamebait? Fuckwits...
Well, some people are playa haters. Thx for the vote of confidence tho.
Anyone that voted for the DMCA.
Which would be fine if the subject under discussion were the DMCA, as that was a whoreoff between the Hollywood Democrats and the big business Republicans. But the DMCA doesn't have anything to do with the current flap over "indecency" fines.
presenting it this way is honest. after all, these two ideas are simply that... ideas.
Um, no. You're throwing details away to try and reach some kind of equivilancy between religion and science when none such exists. Science is all about observing and quantifying, and religion is about speaking out of your ass to explain things you don't understand. Yes, sometimes science gets it wrong, and a hundered years from now scientists will be laughing at how we came to such silly conclusions to some of our observations, but science also gets it right much of the time. Whereas nothing dealing with religion can be provably right, because it's all based around unobservable, unquantifiable forces.
Religion is valuable due to its historical and cultural aspects, but it has no place in any rational effort to explain how the universe works.