These days, I get all my news from either FARK, Slashdot, The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, or The Colbert Report. So, with the New York Times going to a pay site, it just means that none of the aforementioned sites that I keep an eye on will link to them anymore, so they'll eventually die off. The same thing happened with the Wall Street Journal, too -- they're not even on my radar anymore (Thanks, Rupert!)
So... you get all your news from comedy sources and _this_ crowd? Sure, that makes sense. I'm sure you're super well-informed.
First, we both agree that expensive audiophile cables only exist to separate fools from their money.
However, your explanation assumes that the Cat-5 used by all audio equipment conforms to 10/100/1000Base-T wiring standards, which it may or may not.
Nothing prevents any manufacturer from creating a proprietary interconnect that happens to use standard Cat-5 twisted-pair copper wiring with RJ-45 connectors. They could transmit 8-bits of data in parallel with no error correction over all eight wires if they chose to do so. They could even transmit an analog signal.
I still agree with your conclusion, just not your argument.
You know that old joke... You call someone who speaks three languages trilingual. Someone who speaks two is bilingual. It logically follows that someone who speaks only one language is called an American.
Verizon started giving users the option of a Bing based blackberry application, but it's not installed automatically nor is it even added as an optional search provider in the default browser.
As several others have pointed out, the article was correct. The Bing app was pushed to my Verizon Blackberry without notification or consent.
It takes too long to arrow down past the zillion unnecessary links on every page. If people would code their pages properly it wouldn't be so bad, but there's pages of navigation and images and shit all over the place. Sadly, a graphical browser is pretty much required these days.
I can't tell if you're going for funny or not. This is only "sad" if you're firmly stuck in the mindset that all browsers should deliver is text information and that the mouse is a fad.
Personally I find some sites that use all those "images and shit all over the place" to be extremely useful. Google Maps, for instance.
You're basically claiming that the web sucks because it doesn't cater to an interface that the overwhelming majority of users has completely abandoned, the CLI (present company excluded).
You'll have to admit a detailed accounting of the apparently more than $200,000,000 Google has given to the Mozilla Foundation would be interesting.
Maybe, these aren't public funds or donations. I don't really care how they use their funding, I only care about their product. Firefox does cause me some issues but the positives continue to outweigh the negatives.
However, I think it's probable that Chrome will overtake them within the next couple of years.
Both Judges have a history of defending big buisness. This comes as no suprise that they would rule in favor of corporate interest.
Actually, they are ruling in the favor of law. Just because you happen to agree with the FCC doesn't make what they did right.
Imagine the FCC thought throttling was fine, and created policies that punished content providers who didn't properly mark their high-bandwidth traffic. You'd be begging the court for relief for this exact same decision instead of calling them corporate shills.
Even though throttling is bad, the FCC making up their own rules as they go along is worse.
What I notice 3d mostly being used for is "gimmick shots" in movies where some object deliberately leaps out at you. I've never seen a movie where 3d offered some consistent, ever-present visual benefit.
I agreed with this statement until Avatar 3D. No cheesy stuff-jumping-out-at-you shots, just a pervasive feel of greater depth. It's come a long way since Friday the 13th III.
Not sure why you're modded Funny, because your post is right on. The cheesy 3D effects of the 80's made it difficult to convince my wife to go with me to see Avatar in 3D, but we both thought it was well done after seeing it.
This isn't directed towards the parent at all, but I'm not sure when all the folks on/. turned into a bunch of keep-off-my-lawn curmudgeons. No one will be forced to buy a 3D TV anytime soon. Even if it's successful the content providers won't be moving everything to 3D for many years to come. You want your kids to have a holodeck? Then you can expect to see incremental advances along the way. Quit whining.
I still have a 36" Sony WEGA CRT in my bedroom. It's just shy of 300lb. One of the reasons I haven't gone to hi-def is I just don't want to move it. Last time I did, I literally had to wash blood off of it.
Yes I didn't read the whole thing and the part I skimmed I didn't understand, but I have the moral right on/. to comment especially after not reading properly.
You've gotten/. confused with Facebook. or Livejournal.
Nope, they've got it right, for better or for worse.
If someone is willing to come over and enjoy the relative safety and benefits of working in the US, would that same person come over and join the US military and defend this country in a time of war? I doubt it even if they could. The people that are citizens of the US have created this environment through sacrifice. 18-30 year old males will defend the country in time of war either voluntarily or forcefully through a draft while the sponges that come over with work visas will be on the first flight out back to home. So yes, they are only here for the good and not for the bad, basically skimming off the top. The citizens are here for both and the citizens are what made this a desirable place to live for themselves. This argument for me has nothing to do with race or your country of origin it has to do with the responsibility of being a US citizen.
The US military branches gladly accept non-citizens into service and provide US citizenship for them in exchange. In fact, if you serve in active duty during wartime you are eligible for immediate citizenship, without a residency requirement. During peacetime you need to serve honorably for one year and be a legal resident.
"...roughly 35,000 non-citizens are serving in the active military, and about 8,000 enlist each year." (source www.cna.org/documents/D0011092.A2.pdf)
They also tend to stick around longer once they join.
Tell that to Monsanto. If the genes from their GE plants turn up in a farmer's soy crop, he's in for hell even if they just drifted over as pollen from neighboring fields.
In the United States, patents protect not just the device or technique, but also the product of it. Thus, those who patent techniques for isolating genes also have patent-protection for the genes, themselves. Patents do not ordinarily cover "products of nature," but when something exists in a lab in "purified" form, it's exempted from this limitation. http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human_Genome/elsi/patents.shtml
I think you're deliberately misunderstanding a patented product produced by genetic manipulation so that you can introduce a completely unrelated topic.
Genes are not patentable. Products created through genetic manipulation are. Processes by which damaged genes can be identified are. Genes themselves are not.
I wonder if they will patent this so everyone who develops a treatment using techniques discovered here must cough up a royalty?
Why are patents allowed on naturally occurring phenomena like genes anyway?
The genes aren't patentable. The methods they developed probably are. Patents are there to provide incentive for the research to take place at all. There may be some problems on how long patents last and process issues, but fundamentally they are supposed to provide incentive to invest in research and science.
What the fuck is it that you american's live in such state of paranoia?
Yes, I understand that you guys have had some gruesome stuff happen at schools and all, but some dark and frustrated writing on a wall is no threat at all. Man, if Nietzche or Sartre studied in today's america, or even burroughs or kerouac, they'd be behind bars by now.
This type of behavior, on both sides, is certainly not limited to the USA. We just manifest it differently. As an example, many American's consider the ever-present video surveillance of everything in London to be extremely paranoid and incredibly invasive. Have a look at what Australia is doing about monitoring Internet communications and you have another good example.
So basically, the UK and Australia will tolerate Big Brother and American's will tolerate morons. We still get all pissed off about Big Brother, though, even if it doesn't do much good.
It would be interesting to see a productivity study to go along with the accident study. I'm not claiming to know what it might say, but it would be interesting to understand if any tangible benefit could be defined.
It's a business opportunity for other ISPs to offer unlimited access and compete with these greedy assholes.
How are you defining "greedy"? I haven't read their financial statements but I doubt their profit margins are out of line with the rest of their industry. Seems like lately a company is automatically labeled "greedy" if they expect any profit at all. So what's greed? Is it 5% margin? 10%? 25%? Where's the line?
It's funny to think that USA should be the best nation with technology and infrastructure, but still your internet connections suck this much.
By any rational standard the USA is far from the best nation in terms of communications infrastructure. I'm not sure who is, but Japan comes to mind. The USA is probably in the top 10% somewhere.
This makes sense. I had seen a study which showed thermal imaging of a person's head before and after a long cell phone call. The temperature was clearly much higher after a lengthy phone call than before. Scared the shit outta me.
Phones get warm after extended use and... wait, why is this a problem again?
That is something bosses say to scare people into giving up their power. "At least you have a job." Meanwhile, they could do that at any time either way and you took it and liked it in the meantime rather than standing up to management.
Nope, not in management, but I think any entity with too much power is a bad thing. In my opinion, unions qualify. I do not have a union, I have a good job and I have a high standard of living. To me, an IT union is a solution looking for a problem.
Hmmm... Is creating patents for things like this "evil"? Seeking to prevent others from saving energy (unless they pay a toll) is not good for this planet, and I'm not sure if passes for "good".
Just pretend they never had the idea at all and nothing has changed. There, feel better?
I know it's popular to bash Google around these parts, but you're really reaching.
At my last job we didn't have an on call schedule but we were generally expected to be accessible to our customers if Something Bad happened. One Friday night, around 7pm, my colleague got one of those calls. He listened to the customer explain the problem, and then proceeded to tell him that he would be best served by calling the manufacturer's support line as he had been drinking for several hours and would probably just make things worse in his current condition. No one could really fault him; he did the right thing by the customer.
That old excuse "national security" sounds exactly the same whether you pronounce it in English, Chinese, or North Korean.
Oddly enough, that was exactly why Bush said we needed Gitmo, which Obama was vehemently and frequently opposed to many times during the election. Then when he became President, not so much. Makes one wonder what they know that we do not, doesn't it?
Slashdot Mirror
These days, I get all my news from either FARK, Slashdot, The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, or The Colbert Report. So, with the New York Times going to a pay site, it just means that none of the aforementioned sites that I keep an eye on will link to them anymore, so they'll eventually die off. The same thing happened with the Wall Street Journal, too -- they're not even on my radar anymore (Thanks, Rupert!)
So... you get all your news from comedy sources and _this_ crowd? Sure, that makes sense. I'm sure you're super well-informed.
First, we both agree that expensive audiophile cables only exist to separate fools from their money.
However, your explanation assumes that the Cat-5 used by all audio equipment conforms to 10/100/1000Base-T wiring standards, which it may or may not.
Nothing prevents any manufacturer from creating a proprietary interconnect that happens to use standard Cat-5 twisted-pair copper wiring with RJ-45 connectors. They could transmit 8-bits of data in parallel with no error correction over all eight wires if they chose to do so. They could even transmit an analog signal.
I still agree with your conclusion, just not your argument.
You know that old joke... You call someone who speaks three languages trilingual. Someone who speaks two is bilingual. It logically follows that someone who speaks only one language is called an American.
Verizon started giving users the option of a Bing based blackberry application, but it's not installed automatically nor is it even added as an optional search provider in the default browser.
As several others have pointed out, the article was correct. The Bing app was pushed to my Verizon Blackberry without notification or consent.
I do not know exactly how oink works (worked?), but from the quote
All I do is really like Google, to really provide a connection between people. None of the music is on my website.
Wouldn't that make exactly the same defence valid for Pirate Bay and other torrent sites?
Yes, that is TPB's defense. But, different laws and courts for different nations, so the decision in the UK isn't applicable in Sweden.
It takes too long to arrow down past the zillion unnecessary links on every page. If people would code their pages properly it wouldn't be so bad, but there's pages of navigation and images and shit all over the place. Sadly, a graphical browser is pretty much required these days.
I can't tell if you're going for funny or not. This is only "sad" if you're firmly stuck in the mindset that all browsers should deliver is text information and that the mouse is a fad.
Personally I find some sites that use all those "images and shit all over the place" to be extremely useful. Google Maps, for instance.
You're basically claiming that the web sucks because it doesn't cater to an interface that the overwhelming majority of users has completely abandoned, the CLI (present company excluded).
You'll have to admit a detailed accounting of the apparently more than $200,000,000 Google has given to the Mozilla Foundation would be interesting.
Maybe, these aren't public funds or donations. I don't really care how they use their funding, I only care about their product. Firefox does cause me some issues but the positives continue to outweigh the negatives.
However, I think it's probable that Chrome will overtake them within the next couple of years.
Both Judges have a history of defending big buisness. This comes as no suprise that they would rule in favor of corporate interest.
Actually, they are ruling in the favor of law. Just because you happen to agree with the FCC doesn't make what they did right.
Imagine the FCC thought throttling was fine, and created policies that punished content providers who didn't properly mark their high-bandwidth traffic. You'd be begging the court for relief for this exact same decision instead of calling them corporate shills.
Even though throttling is bad, the FCC making up their own rules as they go along is worse.
What I notice 3d mostly being used for is "gimmick shots" in movies where some object deliberately leaps out at you. I've never seen a movie where 3d offered some consistent, ever-present visual benefit.
I agreed with this statement until Avatar 3D. No cheesy stuff-jumping-out-at-you shots, just a pervasive feel of greater depth. It's come a long way since Friday the 13th III.
Not sure why you're modded Funny, because your post is right on. The cheesy 3D effects of the 80's made it difficult to convince my wife to go with me to see Avatar in 3D, but we both thought it was well done after seeing it.
This isn't directed towards the parent at all, but I'm not sure when all the folks on /. turned into a bunch of keep-off-my-lawn curmudgeons. No one will be forced to buy a 3D TV anytime soon. Even if it's successful the content providers won't be moving everything to 3D for many years to come. You want your kids to have a holodeck? Then you can expect to see incremental advances along the way. Quit whining.
I still have a 36" Sony WEGA CRT in my bedroom. It's just shy of 300lb. One of the reasons I haven't gone to hi-def is I just don't want to move it. Last time I did, I literally had to wash blood off of it.
Yes I didn't read the whole thing and the part I skimmed I didn't understand, but I have the moral right on /. to comment especially after not reading properly.
You've gotten /. confused with Facebook. or Livejournal.
Nope, they've got it right, for better or for worse.
My small view...
If someone is willing to come over and enjoy the relative safety and benefits of working in the US, would that same person come over and join the US military and defend this country in a time of war? I doubt it even if they could. The people that are citizens of the US have created this environment through sacrifice. 18-30 year old males will defend the country in time of war either voluntarily or forcefully through a draft while the sponges that come over with work visas will be on the first flight out back to home. So yes, they are only here for the good and not for the bad, basically skimming off the top. The citizens are here for both and the citizens are what made this a desirable place to live for themselves. This argument for me has nothing to do with race or your country of origin it has to do with the responsibility of being a US citizen.
The US military branches gladly accept non-citizens into service and provide US citizenship for them in exchange. In fact, if you serve in active duty during wartime you are eligible for immediate citizenship, without a residency requirement. During peacetime you need to serve honorably for one year and be a legal resident.
"...roughly 35,000 non-citizens are serving in the active military, and about 8,000 enlist each year." (source www.cna.org/documents/D0011092.A2.pdf)
They also tend to stick around longer once they join.
> The genes aren't patentable.
Tell that to Monsanto. If the genes from their GE plants turn up in a farmer's soy crop, he's in for hell even if they just drifted over as pollen from neighboring fields.
In the United States, patents protect not just the device or technique, but also the product of it. Thus, those who patent techniques for isolating genes also have patent-protection for the genes, themselves. Patents do not ordinarily cover "products of nature," but when something exists in a lab in "purified" form, it's exempted from this limitation. http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human_Genome/elsi/patents.shtml
I think you're deliberately misunderstanding a patented product produced by genetic manipulation so that you can introduce a completely unrelated topic.
Genes are not patentable. Products created through genetic manipulation are. Processes by which damaged genes can be identified are. Genes themselves are not.
I wonder if they will patent this so everyone who develops a treatment using techniques discovered here must cough up a royalty?
Why are patents allowed on naturally occurring phenomena like genes anyway?
The genes aren't patentable. The methods they developed probably are. Patents are there to provide incentive for the research to take place at all. There may be some problems on how long patents last and process issues, but fundamentally they are supposed to provide incentive to invest in research and science.
What the fuck is it that you american's live in such state of paranoia?
Yes, I understand that you guys have had some gruesome stuff happen at schools and all, but some dark and frustrated writing on a wall is no threat at all. Man, if Nietzche or Sartre studied in today's america, or even burroughs or kerouac, they'd be behind bars by now.
This type of behavior, on both sides, is certainly not limited to the USA. We just manifest it differently. As an example, many American's consider the ever-present video surveillance of everything in London to be extremely paranoid and incredibly invasive. Have a look at what Australia is doing about monitoring Internet communications and you have another good example.
So basically, the UK and Australia will tolerate Big Brother and American's will tolerate morons. We still get all pissed off about Big Brother, though, even if it doesn't do much good.
It's bad, but it's not that bad.
It would be interesting to see a productivity study to go along with the accident study. I'm not claiming to know what it might say, but it would be interesting to understand if any tangible benefit could be defined.
It's a business opportunity for other ISPs to offer unlimited access and compete with these greedy assholes.
How are you defining "greedy"? I haven't read their financial statements but I doubt their profit margins are out of line with the rest of their industry. Seems like lately a company is automatically labeled "greedy" if they expect any profit at all. So what's greed? Is it 5% margin? 10%? 25%? Where's the line?
It's funny to think that USA should be the best nation with technology and infrastructure, but still your internet connections suck this much.
By any rational standard the USA is far from the best nation in terms of communications infrastructure. I'm not sure who is, but Japan comes to mind. The USA is probably in the top 10% somewhere.
This makes sense. I had seen a study which showed thermal imaging of a person's head before and after a long cell phone call. The temperature was clearly much higher after a lengthy phone call than before. Scared the shit outta me.
Phones get warm after extended use and... wait, why is this a problem again?
That's a great argument -- are you in management?
That is something bosses say to scare people into giving up their power. "At least you have a job." Meanwhile, they could do that at any time either way and you took it and liked it in the meantime rather than standing up to management.
Nope, not in management, but I think any entity with too much power is a bad thing. In my opinion, unions qualify. I do not have a union, I have a good job and I have a high standard of living. To me, an IT union is a solution looking for a problem.
Hmmm... Is creating patents for things like this "evil"? Seeking to prevent others from saving energy (unless they pay a toll) is not good for this planet, and I'm not sure if passes for "good".
Just pretend they never had the idea at all and nothing has changed. There, feel better?
I know it's popular to bash Google around these parts, but you're really reaching.
At my last job we didn't have an on call schedule but we were generally expected to be accessible to our customers if Something Bad happened. One Friday night, around 7pm, my colleague got one of those calls. He listened to the customer explain the problem, and then proceeded to tell him that he would be best served by calling the manufacturer's support line as he had been drinking for several hours and would probably just make things worse in his current condition. No one could really fault him; he did the right thing by the customer.
You hear that? That loud sucking sound? It's the sound of an IT union driving the last of our jobs overseas at warp speed.
That old excuse "national security" sounds exactly the same whether you pronounce it in English, Chinese, or North Korean.
Oddly enough, that was exactly why Bush said we needed Gitmo, which Obama was vehemently and frequently opposed to many times during the election. Then when he became President, not so much. Makes one wonder what they know that we do not, doesn't it?