You forgot one small detail: even with javascript turned on, the Gawker page still has a seriously über-fucked up design that will scare all visitors away, which means nobody will watch their ads more than once.
Because, even if they don't buy canned music, a sizable part of the people who listen to it are the type to buy merchandise and go to concerts, which does result in financial gain.
It still makes sense, if I understand it right: Apple utterly hates that anybody other than Apple themselves has any control over anything that happens in their iSomethings, and the DRM meant that the Crapp^HCopyright holders had some control over iTunes content.
The USA is clearly a republic (which means that leadership is not hereditary); it's also a federation (because that's the way it's organized), and it's also a democracy (which means that people has the power; in a representative democracy, said people hires politicians to manage the country for them).
In other words, if they are saying that the USA is not a democracy because it's a republic, they're objectively wrong on at least two levels.
Spreading fear and hate certainly is not part of the Christian message in my book.
Is it not? Try telling that to Jesus, he pretty much invented from scrap the whole "fear of hell" dungturd. Before him, IIRC, jews said that everyone went after death to the same place right under Yhwh's glory forever; if you loved him and were a good jew that should make you happy, and if you weren't you'd suffer from guilt and remorse under him. Similar, but not quite the same.
In other words, even a broken clock can give the right time twice a day.
"When you start from wrong premises, if your logic is flawless you will always end with wrong results. But if you use faulty logic, you still have a random chance of giving the right answer."
I don't really see the drawback to eliminating Flash NOW and scheduling the elimination of h264 in 2 or 4 or 6 years when enough phones have moved through the market to make hardware support fairly standard.
I see one: Flash is so "open" that currently there are no fully-usable alternatives; the guys at GNash, Lightspark and SWFDec are working on it, but it'll take a while to replace it. However, there is an alternative to h264 that is good enough, and that works now. Again, there will be a few drawbacks for WebM on mobile devices until the upcoming hardware with full VP8 support starts to replace current devices, but unless MPEG-LA manages to eat everybody's brains and force h264 as a standard, it's just a matter of time.
Slashdot Mirror
And also ditch the imperial system.
Quoted for truth
Additionally, GMO toxins have been detected in the blood of fetuses, potentially effecting development.
Surely you mean " Affecting ".
Yes, I'm a grammar talib. Problem?
Except for the fake replies, that already exists too. I'm afraid it doesn't do the "trollnet" part mentioned around here, though.
You forgot one small detail: even with javascript turned on, the Gawker page still has a seriously über-fucked up design that will scare all visitors away, which means nobody will watch their ads more than once.
In other words, you agree that the model you're trying to protect is immoral, yet you still try to protect it?
You forgot to add Uwe Boll to that list.
Because, even if they don't buy canned music, a sizable part of the people who listen to it are the type to buy merchandise and go to concerts, which does result in financial gain.
Even if applying the lucrum cesans principle to this context was not bullshit (which it is), it would still be completely different from theft.
But if you can't buy, by definition you are NOT a "lost sale". Thus, you can't harm them, at least not directly.
Musicians don't make alot off of cd sales anyway, specially if they do belong to a label.
Fixed.
You see, we have a lot of folks who want to wax phiosophical about why software should be free [...]
Let me remind everybody that what most of those folks mean with "free" has nothing to do with what you seem to think they mean.
It still makes sense, if I understand it right: Apple utterly hates that anybody other than Apple themselves has any control over anything that happens in their iSomethings, and the DRM meant that the Crapp^HCopyright holders had some control over iTunes content.
The USA is clearly a republic (which means that leadership is not hereditary); it's also a federation (because that's the way it's organized), and it's also a democracy (which means that people has the power; in a representative democracy, said people hires politicians to manage the country for them).
In other words, if they are saying that the USA is not a democracy because it's a republic, they're objectively wrong on at least two levels.
But it's still banned from stores, isn't it?
It doesn't, but it does make them a bank in Luxembourg, and you're their client. Sue them there.
That would essentially kill Google's need to shoehorn VP8,
Fixed
Free Speech Flag-style
Well, let's make it clear that the game won't be bought unless it has no DRM of any kind at all.
Spreading fear and hate certainly is not part of the Christian message in my book.
Is it not? Try telling that to Jesus, he pretty much invented from scrap the whole "fear of hell" dungturd. Before him, IIRC, jews said that everyone went after death to the same place right under Yhwh's glory forever; if you loved him and were a good jew that should make you happy, and if you weren't you'd suffer from guilt and remorse under him. Similar, but not quite the same.
In other words, even a broken clock can give the right time twice a day.
"When you start from wrong premises, if your logic is flawless you will always end with wrong results. But if you use faulty logic, you still have a random chance of giving the right answer."
Yup, that's pretty much it. It's a good thing they're totally über-wrong, isn't it?
So if Windows makes computers cheaper, what exactly is the Microsoft tax?
You fail at reading. Look at your parent post:
it's usually cheaper to buy a laptop on sale [...]
Windows doesn't make computers cheaper, being on sale makes computers cheaper.
Just openness vs actual freedom. Which one is more important?
I don't really see the drawback to eliminating Flash NOW and scheduling the elimination of h264 in 2 or 4 or 6 years when enough phones have moved through the market to make hardware support fairly standard.
I see one: Flash is so "open" that currently there are no fully-usable alternatives; the guys at GNash, Lightspark and SWFDec are working on it, but it'll take a while to replace it. However, there is an alternative to h264 that is good enough, and that works now. Again, there will be a few drawbacks for WebM on mobile devices until the upcoming hardware with full VP8 support starts to replace current devices, but unless MPEG-LA manages to eat everybody's brains and force h264 as a standard, it's just a matter of time.
Please define "doesn't work"