Politicians are basically owned by the big money corporations that put the politicians in office. The politicos don't know about tech, and don't care either. The lobbyists write the bills, and the give the bills to the politicians to pass - along with a big campaign contribution, of course.
Do you actually think SOPA started in congress? Some congressmen, all of the sudden, thought it was important to save the content providers?
All the stuff about "politicians don't understand tech well enough to make laws about it" is just silly. Congress doesn't even read the bills it passes, and congress certainly does not write the bills.
Specifically, what do they realistically expect? An end to greed? Good luck with that.
If they had a realistic, specific, stated objective, they may have been effective. For example: a higher tax for the wealthy, or a lower tax for the poor. Something like that.
There was a, much quiter, protest movement. I foget what it was called but it was about moving money from big banks, to credit unions and local banks. Seems to me that would get the point across much better than living in a tent in some park.
Paperwork takes much more processing, and costs them a significant amount of money. If every verizon customer started paying by snail mail, they may revize this scam policy.
Let's all pick on THE innovative company who is simply going after others for copying their intellectual property,
Apple is only innovative in it's ways to restrain free trade, because Apple cannot compete otherwise. Apple's patents, and lawsuits, are frivolous bullshit, and we both know it.
Samsung. Reality check: how many other companies given the same amount of power Apple wields would not use it in the same way?
I don't see Google filing bullshit patent lawsuits all over the place.
Samsung is even bigger than Apple, but I don't see that kind of shameful behavior from Samsung. Samsung is only defending itself against an agressive patent scam company.
A boycott will not sway all Apple users, of course, but it might sway enough.
Godaddy only lost about 72K domains. As I understand it, there are about 45 million domains registered at godaddy. Clearly the boycott did not say *all* godaddy users, but it swayed enough.
Besides, boycott may be counterproductive -- Apple left on its own can well generate more bad will than Apple pestered by boycotts. So, instead of recommending a boycott, inform your readers about the problems Apple is creating and help them make informed and rational decisions about their purchases. And if they decide Apple is good for them, then let them have it -- it is their choice, after all.
WTF?
The publicity from a boycott would only help generate bad will. And I mean help quite a lot. Consider the recent boycotts of BofA, and Godaddy.
People should understand that buying from is bad for everybody, because it promotes abusing the patent system to restrain free trade.
I get it. I see where you are going with this, but lets be honest. Whether it's Google, Microsoft, Apple or whoever...Patents are patents. You think Google, if the sides were switched, wouldn't do the same thing. If you say no, you're ignorant.
Excuse me, I think it is 100% apparent that Google would certainly not do the same thing. Whatever complaints you have against google, goolge has never been a scummy patent troll - which is more than Microsoft, or Apple, can say.
And yes, Virginia, Google could patent troll if they wanted to do so.
Boycots against any company are foolish because it's a very poor way to send any message. The signal is lost in a vast sea of noise of purchases. As noted, Apple isn't even the most egregious player here....
Where do you get your "facts" just make them up as you go? Boycotts have been proven to be extremely effective. And Apple is even worse than Microsoft when it comes to abusing the patent system to restrain free trade.
Anybody can see what is going on here. Apple does not want to compete in a free market, so Apple is trying to rig the system with a load of bullshit patents like rounded corners.
For example, I'm sure Apple's $150+ iPod Nano is a quality product. But you can get a Sansa Clip, which is better in many respects, for $30; and not have to fight with iTunes.
Let's be honest, sure Apple makes some quality products, but for a lot of people, a lot of the appeal of Apple is a fashion statement. When Apple looks like a scummy IP troll, maybe Apple stuff won't be so fashionable. The high fashion world is finckle.
I lot of people who used to think that godaddy suited them best, decided to take another look. Could the same thing happen to Apple? I come across people who are frustrated with iTunes, and don't see the point of a $150 Nano, when a $30 Sansa clip seems to do the job just as well.
Slashdot Mirror
Politicians are basically owned by the big money corporations that put the politicians in office. The politicos don't know about tech, and don't care either. The lobbyists write the bills, and the give the bills to the politicians to pass - along with a big campaign contribution, of course.
Do you actually think SOPA started in congress? Some congressmen, all of the sudden, thought it was important to save the content providers?
All the stuff about "politicians don't understand tech well enough to make laws about it" is just silly. Congress doesn't even read the bills it passes, and congress certainly does not write the bills.
All JMHO, of course.
Win2k was the best desktop OS MS ever developed. All just fluff after that.
Specifically, what do they realistically expect? An end to greed? Good luck with that.
If they had a realistic, specific, stated objective, they may have been effective. For example: a higher tax for the wealthy, or a lower tax for the poor. Something like that.
There was a, much quiter, protest movement. I foget what it was called but it was about moving money from big banks, to credit unions and local banks. Seems to me that would get the point across much better than living in a tent in some park.
I thought the exact same thing. How do open APIs on facebook replace Linux as an OS?
Paperwork takes much more processing, and costs them a significant amount of money. If every verizon customer started paying by snail mail, they may revize this scam policy.
Also, consider changing carrier.
With Chrome, you can set Bing to your default search, if you want.
But, I don't think MSIE will let you set Google to your default search engine. At least, not without a lot of trouble.
Apple chose to file all of those frivolous patents, and frivolous lawsuits.
How about BofA boycott?
Funny, I thought both of those were fairly popular.
What did Apple "invent" that is worthy of a patent?
Every mobile phone maker is suing every other mobile phone maker.
By that you mean: other phone makers are trying to defend themselves against the Apple, and Microsoft, patent scam blitz.
Apple is 100% to blame for this. It is not fair to blame Samsung for trying to defend itself against Apple's aggressive patent scam.
Let's all pick on THE innovative company who is simply going after others for copying their intellectual property,
Apple is only innovative in it's ways to restrain free trade, because Apple cannot compete otherwise. Apple's patents, and lawsuits, are frivolous bullshit, and we both know it.
What did Apple "invent" first, that is worthy of a patent?
Google is not abusing the patent system in an attempt to restrain free trade.
Apple just does want to compete. We all know Apple's patents are pure bullshit.
Samsung. Reality check: how many other companies given the same amount of power Apple wields would not use it in the same way?
I don't see Google filing bullshit patent lawsuits all over the place.
Samsung is even bigger than Apple, but I don't see that kind of shameful behavior from Samsung. Samsung is only defending itself against an agressive patent scam company.
Apple chose to be a shameful IP scam company. And Apple can chose to stop. I don't see Google file dozens of bullshit patent lawsuits all the time.
A boycott will not sway all Apple users, of course, but it might sway enough.
Godaddy only lost about 72K domains. As I understand it, there are about 45 million domains registered at godaddy. Clearly the boycott did not say *all* godaddy users, but it swayed enough.
Besides, boycott may be counterproductive -- Apple left on its own can well generate more bad will than Apple pestered by boycotts. So, instead of recommending a boycott, inform your readers about the problems Apple is creating and help them make informed and rational decisions about their purchases. And if they decide Apple is good for them, then let them have it -- it is their choice, after all.
WTF?
The publicity from a boycott would only help generate bad will. And I mean help quite a lot. Consider the recent boycotts of BofA, and Godaddy.
People should understand that buying from is bad for everybody, because it promotes abusing the patent system to restrain free trade.
I get it. I see where you are going with this, but lets be honest. Whether it's Google, Microsoft, Apple or whoever...Patents are patents. You think Google, if the sides were switched, wouldn't do the same thing. If you say no, you're ignorant.
Excuse me, I think it is 100% apparent that Google would certainly not do the same thing. Whatever complaints you have against google, goolge has never been a scummy patent troll - which is more than Microsoft, or Apple, can say.
And yes, Virginia, Google could patent troll if they wanted to do so.
Boycots against any company are foolish because it's a very poor way to send any message. The signal is lost in a vast sea of noise of purchases. As noted, Apple isn't even the most egregious player here....
Where do you get your "facts" just make them up as you go? Boycotts have been proven to be extremely effective. And Apple is even worse than Microsoft when it comes to abusing the patent system to restrain free trade.
Anybody can see what is going on here. Apple does not want to compete in a free market, so Apple is trying to rig the system with a load of bullshit patents like rounded corners.
MLK, Ghandi, and more recently, the Godaddy boycott.
Boycotts can be extremely effective.
For example, I'm sure Apple's $150+ iPod Nano is a quality product. But you can get a Sansa Clip, which is better in many respects, for $30; and not have to fight with iTunes.
Let's be honest, sure Apple makes some quality products, but for a lot of people, a lot of the appeal of Apple is a fashion statement. When Apple looks like a scummy IP troll, maybe Apple stuff won't be so fashionable. The high fashion world is finckle.
From that single website, the idea has progressed to slashdot, which still a lot of readers.
If you remember, the Godaddy boycott seemed to take off shortly after Godaddy SOPA's stance was reported on a single tech website.
From about 3 days ago? It was enough to get Godaddy to back off their SOPA support.
So yes, it seems that boycotts are still effective.
I lot of people who used to think that godaddy suited them best, decided to take another look. Could the same thing happen to Apple? I come across people who are frustrated with iTunes, and don't see the point of a $150 Nano, when a $30 Sansa clip seems to do the job just as well.
without quotes.
Although 72k is not that high either.
Then again, it takes a while to transfer a domain. Who knows, maybe the number was significant.