No, the answer is not to patronize those with Crappy service. But from the looks of it, service doesn't really matter much to most people here. People don't want to pay for good service, so they get cheap service and complain that it is CRAPPY.
Price, Quality and Service. You can have only two of the three.
Cell phones have existed since LONG before AT&T was broken up. The idea that AT&T would BLOCK None network cell phones is still okay. Cell phones would grow up outside of the network and actually create their own, perhaps even many different "Flavors" of networks. AT&T wouldn't have any control whatsoever in that case, and they would have had to respond.
Competition is enevitable as replacements and alternatives to monopolies are created. The point being, even a monopoly will have some competition, and still has to provide value for the products they use.
Let us take a look at one of the LAST true monopolies.... DeBeers.
Competition has finally come from an unexpected source. Manufactured Diamonds. DeBeers has NO control over the two companies who have independantly created PERFECT diamonds in the lab.
The BEST DeBeers can offer is "those are not real diamonds". How long is that going to work if the ONLY way to tell a created diamond from a real one, is through a high tech spectrum analyzer, and reading the UNIQUE attributes of those Perfect Diamonds.
Does the little lady care that one diamond comes from South Africa and the other comes from South Florida? Or does she care that for the same money, she can have the ROCK that impresses all her friends being 3 - 5 times bigger ( And they say "size doesn't matter" LOL )
I suspect that in 5-10 years, created diamonds and DeBeers Diamonds are much closer together in price, AND alot of people will be PISSED that their 14 grams of Crystalized Carbon is worth only 1/3 what they paid.
Again, I am not against Monopolies, since they will ALWAYS create alternatives.
BTW, I haven't read the book, but I have read some others including "Future Shock" and "The Third Wave" by Alvin Toffler. It is interesting to compare what he wrote back then to the way the world is today.
Part of the problem with AT&T was that it was partially mandated Monopoly. The other part of the problem is that UTILITY monopolies make some sense, in that you don't want 140 different points of entry coming into your house, one for each Power, Telcom, Gas, Water etc.
As for AT&T breakup, you are assuming that the Internet was a RESULT of the breakup, and NOT a result of INEVITABILITY. In addition, you are not considering the buildout of Cellular service either, which might have been better, and wider coverage. Or perhaps some OTHER technology (WIFI network) used to BYPASS the Monopoly.
Or some OTHER unforseen and now unrealized positive consequence of letting AT&T live as a monopoly. One cannot undo what has been done, only muse over what might have been. In every case of a monopoly, there is a way around it, one that we may not have realized, which MIGHT have been better in the long run.
Capitalism is not a guarantee to make a profit. I find Open Source just as Capitalistic as Closed Source is. Open Source projects, for the most part, lose MONEY in developement, and expect no profits, as a direct source of selling said projects.
Instead, projects are developed and funded by people to USE those projects to create profits as a SIDE benifit, and those profits are not tied directly to the developement or use of those products.
Let us take a big corporation that spends $$ on an "Office" product. They do so, not because "Office" makes them money directly, but because it helps them make money. Big Corporation realizes that it can take a percentage of $$ money spend on licenses, and apply it to an "Open source" project and even direct the project to include features not found in "Office" and end up with a product that is immeasurably better than the original "Office".
Big Company #2, #3 etc all start to realize the same thing, it becomes CHEAPER and BETTER than the original "Office", and each contribute. It actually because Cheaper in the long run to fund Open Source than it does to pay licenses for each new version of "Office".
The company who originally created "Office" (copied actually) complains about "Anti competitive behaviour" and "profits" are only trying to protect that which is not rightfully theirs (the right to profit).
To me, protectionism doesn't work. It is trying to protect the buggy and whip industries as cars start becoming ubiquitous.
I am all for monopolies, as they create other opportunities for innovation. Microsoft is a monopoly and I don't have a problem with it, because THAT is exactly what fostered Open Source.
If STANDARD OIL wasn't broken up, we might actually have ALTERNATIVES to hydrocarbon fuels today. In a free and open society, Monopolies are short lived, because people find OTHER WAYS of doing the same thing.
1) haven't read the book 2) Had to think for a second about it 3) Figure there would be less clueful people who couldn't figure it out on their own
I also considered Posting AC, but thought, "I don't read AC comments (except yours, hmmm), a lot of others don't either", and risked it just to be a tad helpful.
Here is the quote from the FireWire TradeGroup concerning Licensing the Logo and Trademarked Name.
"Subject to Licensee's compliance with the term of this Agreement, Licensor Grants Licensee a limited, not-exclusive, no-transferable, royalty-free, worldwideright and license to use, and let others use, the FireWire Marks, incliding the FireWire logo,....."
Apple's license for the Firewire name doesn't cost any money. It is free to use as long as you follow licensing requirements. The change was made as a direct or indirect response to Sony's iLink trade name for the same device.
The result is Sony now uses "Firewire", and iLink is gone.
Democrats and Republicans BOTH do the WRONG stuff for the Right reasons. The road to hell is paved with good intentions, and this is just one one of many cases where the the wrong thing was done under the reasoning of protecting the population from themselves.
America, has become, the "Land of the sheep, home of the terrified". People are scared that they may lose all the comfort provided by the Welfare loving Democrats or the Military Spending of the Republicans.
ENOUGH is ENOUGH. It isn't the Government's responsibility to do anything but to Provide COMMON defense and PROMOTE the general welfare. THAT IS IT.
The fact that all these laws have been passed is PROOF that the terrorists have achieved their goal, to TERRORIZE. People are SCARED, and the MEDIA feeds the fear.
Here is another wonderful example of Apple beating Microsoft on more than one level.
1. Over all Coolness AND Geek Factors. 2. Usefulness of coolness factor. 3. Ease of use of Geek factor.
Microsoft hasn't done anything remotely like this in thier existance, rarely do they push the tech envelope beyond the what has become ordinary and benign. And when they do, they end up with over analized and engineered products nobody want (Bob?).
Apple of the otherhand is OFTEN making stuff WAY before the curve. Newton/PDA, USB/Firewire, CDROMs, Floppylessness (is that a word), standard networking.......... and now Beowolf clustering out of the BOX!!!
If Apple is smart with this, they could play against the new model of "ON DEMAND" services from companies like IBM.
Imagine a corporation that could automatically timeshare, timeshift computing resources based on such technology using the workstations they currently own/purchase. Peak periods of processing could be syphoned from little or unused desktops "On Demand", back filling any need left over from the DP center.
If this is NOT revolutionary it will be at least evolutionary.
Rom 3:12 They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.
Mat 7:22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
Mat 7:23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
Okay, now that I have that troll (pun intended) out of the way.
I personally like KDE over Gnome. That being said, I am all for picking just ONE, desktop to be the ONE. I see arguements for BOTH. However, I think the inclusion of one over the other should NOT be made primarily on Religious/political grounds, but on Technical ones.
Things like USABILITY, SPEED, APPLICATIONS, and DEVELOPEMENT, should be the deciding factor. Of course much of that is very subjective, but a consensus can be reached.
Further, Userlinux can actually benifit marketing wise, if they just PICKED ONE as the ONE. No confusion on software boxes. "Requires Userlinux 4.0".
If people really want the option of the OTHER the softwarebox could say, "Requires Userlinux 4.0 with KDE".
Slashdot Mirror
Sounds like rules from Bastard Operator from Hell.
No, the answer is not to patronize those with Crappy service. But from the looks of it, service doesn't really matter much to most people here. People don't want to pay for good service, so they get cheap service and complain that it is CRAPPY.
Price, Quality and Service. You can have only two of the three.
Cell phones have existed since LONG before AT&T was broken up. The idea that AT&T would BLOCK None network cell phones is still okay. Cell phones would grow up outside of the network and actually create their own, perhaps even many different "Flavors" of networks. AT&T wouldn't have any control whatsoever in that case, and they would have had to respond.
Competition is enevitable as replacements and alternatives to monopolies are created. The point being, even a monopoly will have some competition, and still has to provide value for the products they use.
Let us take a look at one of the LAST true monopolies.... DeBeers.
Competition has finally come from an unexpected source. Manufactured Diamonds. DeBeers has NO control over the two companies who have independantly created PERFECT diamonds in the lab.
The BEST DeBeers can offer is "those are not real diamonds". How long is that going to work if the ONLY way to tell a created diamond from a real one, is through a high tech spectrum analyzer, and reading the UNIQUE attributes of those Perfect Diamonds.
Does the little lady care that one diamond comes from South Africa and the other comes from South Florida? Or does she care that for the same money, she can have the ROCK that impresses all her friends being 3 - 5 times bigger ( And they say "size doesn't matter" LOL )
I suspect that in 5-10 years, created diamonds and DeBeers Diamonds are much closer together in price, AND alot of people will be PISSED that their 14 grams of Crystalized Carbon is worth only 1/3 what they paid.
Again, I am not against Monopolies, since they will ALWAYS create alternatives.
BTW, I haven't read the book, but I have read some others including "Future Shock" and "The Third Wave" by Alvin Toffler. It is interesting to compare what he wrote back then to the way the world is today.
Part of the problem with AT&T was that it was partially mandated Monopoly. The other part of the problem is that UTILITY monopolies make some sense, in that you don't want 140 different points of entry coming into your house, one for each Power, Telcom, Gas, Water etc.
As for AT&T breakup, you are assuming that the Internet was a RESULT of the breakup, and NOT a result of INEVITABILITY. In addition, you are not considering the buildout of Cellular service either, which might have been better, and wider coverage. Or perhaps some OTHER technology (WIFI network) used to BYPASS the Monopoly.
Or some OTHER unforseen and now unrealized positive consequence of letting AT&T live as a monopoly. One cannot undo what has been done, only muse over what might have been. In every case of a monopoly, there is a way around it, one that we may not have realized, which MIGHT have been better in the long run.
Capitalism is not a guarantee to make a profit. I find Open Source just as Capitalistic as Closed Source is. Open Source projects, for the most part, lose MONEY in developement, and expect no profits, as a direct source of selling said projects.
Instead, projects are developed and funded by people to USE those projects to create profits as a SIDE benifit, and those profits are not tied directly to the developement or use of those products.
Let us take a big corporation that spends $$ on an "Office" product. They do so, not because "Office" makes them money directly, but because it helps them make money. Big Corporation realizes that it can take a percentage of $$ money spend on licenses, and apply it to an "Open source" project and even direct the project to include features not found in "Office" and end up with a product that is immeasurably better than the original "Office".
Big Company #2, #3 etc all start to realize the same thing, it becomes CHEAPER and BETTER than the original "Office", and each contribute. It actually because Cheaper in the long run to fund Open Source than it does to pay licenses for each new version of "Office".
The company who originally created "Office" (copied actually) complains about "Anti competitive behaviour" and "profits" are only trying to protect that which is not rightfully theirs (the right to profit).
To me, protectionism doesn't work. It is trying to protect the buggy and whip industries as cars start becoming ubiquitous.
I am all for monopolies, as they create other opportunities for innovation. Microsoft is a monopoly and I don't have a problem with it, because THAT is exactly what fostered Open Source.
If STANDARD OIL wasn't broken up, we might actually have ALTERNATIVES to hydrocarbon fuels today. In a free and open society, Monopolies are short lived, because people find OTHER WAYS of doing the same thing.
Hitler.
Oh, by the way, I agree completely. I believe most politicians are criminals, including your country's.
I felt the need since I
1) haven't read the book
2) Had to think for a second about it
3) Figure there would be less clueful people who couldn't figure it out on their own
I also considered Posting AC, but thought, "I don't read AC comments (except yours, hmmm), a lot of others don't either", and risked it just to be a tad helpful.
For those who don't know ...
HitchHikers Guide to the Galaxy
http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/
"with a one handed keyboard to use it"
.....
Okay, I see where you are going with your idea
And remove upstream until all associations are removed, to the root invitee. Then Remove all the association down from that same invitee.
Call it "Pruning the tree".
NASA has just confirmed what many have believed. That there is life on Mars. Detailed image has just been made public.
This discovery also explains why all the Mars spacecraft keeps going off line.
http://endtimedebate.com/Mars1.jpg
"I'm sorry, but I despise them like I despise neo-nazi, racists, thugs"
Why do you have to insult Neo-Nazi, Racist, Thugs like that?
was a bit of a stretch myself.
Coke would no doubt claim that water is nothing more than the dreaded "Dihdrogen Monoxide" and provide a "unbiased" link to the DHMO web site.
http://www.dhmo.org/
"At any other university, people would have just laughed. But this is Wisconsin. It's cheese. And this is no laughing matter,"
o du cts_id/229
Actually according to
http://www.cheesesupply.com/product_info.php/pr
it is.
Goatsex link.
Ohhh my eyes.
Duped again.
Here is the quote from the FireWire TradeGroup concerning Licensing the Logo and Trademarked Name.
G ui des_v6.pdf
"Subject to Licensee's compliance with the term of this Agreement, Licensor Grants Licensee a limited, not-exclusive, no-transferable, royalty-free, worldwideright and license to use, and let others use, the FireWire Marks, incliding the FireWire logo,....."
Download the PDF from here, and see for yourself:
http://www.1394ta.org/license/FireWire_License-
Apple's license for the Firewire name doesn't cost any money. It is free to use as long as you follow licensing requirements. The change was made as a direct or indirect response to Sony's iLink trade name for the same device.
The result is Sony now uses "Firewire", and iLink is gone.
PodPaqer?
Or is that too Risque?
Democrats and Republicans BOTH do the WRONG stuff for the Right reasons. The road to hell is paved with good intentions, and this is just one one of many cases where the the wrong thing was done under the reasoning of protecting the population from themselves.
America, has become, the "Land of the sheep, home of the terrified". People are scared that they may lose all the comfort provided by the Welfare loving Democrats or the Military Spending of the Republicans.
ENOUGH is ENOUGH. It isn't the Government's responsibility to do anything but to Provide COMMON defense and PROMOTE the general welfare. THAT IS IT.
The fact that all these laws have been passed is PROOF that the terrorists have achieved their goal, to TERRORIZE. People are SCARED, and the MEDIA feeds the fear.
Here is another wonderful example of Apple beating Microsoft on more than one level.
.......... and now Beowolf clustering out of the BOX!!!
1. Over all Coolness AND Geek Factors.
2. Usefulness of coolness factor.
3. Ease of use of Geek factor.
Microsoft hasn't done anything remotely like this in thier existance, rarely do they push the tech envelope beyond the what has become ordinary and benign. And when they do, they end up with over analized and engineered products nobody want (Bob?).
Apple of the otherhand is OFTEN making stuff WAY before the curve. Newton/PDA, USB/Firewire, CDROMs, Floppylessness (is that a word), standard networking
If Apple is smart with this, they could play against the new model of "ON DEMAND" services from companies like IBM.
Imagine a corporation that could automatically timeshare, timeshift computing resources based on such technology using the workstations they currently own/purchase. Peak periods of processing could be syphoned from little or unused desktops "On Demand", back filling any need left over from the DP center.
If this is NOT revolutionary it will be at least evolutionary.
Rom 3:12 They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.
Mat 7:22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
Mat 7:23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
Begun, the flame wars have.
Okay, now that I have that troll (pun intended) out of the way.
I personally like KDE over Gnome. That being said, I am all for picking just ONE, desktop to be the ONE. I see arguements for BOTH. However, I think the inclusion of one over the other should NOT be made primarily on Religious/political grounds, but on Technical ones.
Things like USABILITY, SPEED, APPLICATIONS, and DEVELOPEMENT, should be the deciding factor. Of course much of that is very subjective, but a consensus can be reached.
Further, Userlinux can actually benifit marketing wise, if they just PICKED ONE as the ONE. No confusion on software boxes. "Requires Userlinux 4.0".
If people really want the option of the OTHER the softwarebox could say, "Requires Userlinux 4.0 with KDE".
Aren't Gnomes and Trolls Related?