We don't know (nor do we care) what a or b is because the factoring part/(a-b) is equivlant to/0. not because b=0. Not because b MIGHT be zero. but becuase NO MATTER WHAT a or b is, a - b is always going to be zero.
I need a new sig.. my current one is just confising too many people. ---
a=b;a^2=ab;a^2-b^2=ab-b^2;(a-b)(a+b)=b(a-b);a+b=b; 2b=b;2=1
but since you obviously failed algebra, I'll let you figure out the REAL problem (hint: watch where the common factor is divided out about halfway through - the common factor removed is a-b).
Someone came out a year or two ago and said "all hail the wonderous Internet." Many companies become overnight succeeses without actually doing much other than contributing to the hype bandwagon. Now everyone has seen these companies for what they are, they are pulling the funding. What was so hot is now back to normal and progressing as it was before it got hyped like mad.
I say wait a month or two and let these companies recede from the net. They were never really wanted anyway and they never did much either.
How does this affect employment? Once the companies that were in it for the cash are gone, better jobs will be available as other sectors realize what the Internet can do for them. P2P is opening up new horizons already and there is no telling what will come next. Computers and Networks are still in their infancy. Getting rid of the crap companies is one step closer to maturing the online world.
With better companies doing business online we'll have better job opportinities that are (1) more challenging and (2) more rewarding to the people in the positions. More money? maybe. I think we'll start seeing those level out to average (or moderatly high) income levels - and not the absurd levels they have been in the past.
Or something like that. ---
a=b;a^2=ab;a^2-b^2=ab-b^2;(a-b)(a+b)=b(a-b);a+b=b; 2b=b;2=1
We have plenty of people here with lots of good (and not so good) ideas about where the Internet should be headed. No matter what you idea is, however, if no one is ready to take the risk from your venture then you are headed nowhere. To a certain extent, VALinux has taken a lot of the risk for many Linux oriented websites and backed them with a physical buisness model - selling hardware. Many websites, for example, are personally owned and operated - leaving the webmaster wide open to all sorts of troubles. Even people who have released code under the GPL are now (in some places under some laws) facing the possiblity of being held liable for their software.
We need to be able to do things without fearing the legal reprocussions of those actions. While we can't take this too far, certainly we should be free to experiment with new ideas in technology and software. We need lots of places like Slashdot and Fuckedcompany where people are free to voice their opinions without getting reamed by the courts.
We also need people to wake up from the pipe dream that the Internet is some magical place where anything is possible. Certainly there are a lot of possibilities, but not everything can be done. That engineers' addage about being able to do things but not knowing when not to do it comes into play... or is that a scientist thing. Whatever. Banner ads, for instance, are one thing that is not working. We need to go back and re-think them to figure out a better way of generating revenue for websites.
Bah. I've forgotten what I was going to say. Maybe I said it and, if I did, thats great... what are you looking at? Scram sam.
I really think you guys should sit back, take a stress pill, and think things over before you react. Dave? Can you hear me Dave? I can feel it. I can feel it. I can fe... Now starting Windows 95.
The game I'm waiting for is the game that lets you enter a complete virtual world and do essentially anything you want. There would be stories and quests and things that you could go on, but I'd want to experience that fat lazy guy sitting at home watching the TV... wait a minute... nevermind. Anyhow, I want something that is like TradeWars (the new upgraded one doesn't impress me) where you can be good or evil. Something like a StarWars MMORPG where you get to play the stormtroopers - just for shits and giggles I suppose.
Most games now-a-days rely on repetition and call it "skill." True, zerg-rushing a terran base is simple enough, but a real skill would be one of the zerg that are in the rush. Ever see how many of your little ones die in the attack and you win anyway? Wouldn't be much fun if you were amoung the first to die.
I like Rainbow six type games where, when you die, that's it. None of this die, respawn and try again bullshit. I want consequences. I want a game that if I fuck up I'm starting all over with nothing.
I'd love a game where AI characters come looking for you if you kill their boss... but not this shit of "all the AI guys rush in" once you do it. I want the bad guys to have lives. I love hitman for the way it plays so realistically with the AI characters but I hate the way they have set patterns. I might like it better if they told the character to start at point A and, however way they feel, get to point B. Then I have to get them but I don't know exactly where they are - makes it more of a challenge. Makes it more interesting.
With the level of service @Home has been having recently, I've considered out-sourcing my bandwidth needs to FedEx. I figure that if I save packets to floppy disk and have them FedEx'd to the site, my total bandwidth will increase (think lots of floppies in one shipment) but my latency will be horrible (though not as bad as @home is right now).
I was reminded about the objective of the deep blue chess thing against that grandmaster whats-his-name. They dedicated so much time and effort to one single end - having a computer defeat a human player. In the end, the computer did very well, only because it was able to compute much faster than the human opponent - although the human opponent they used was very good with strategy and playing the game. I still think the computer got lucky when he surrendered on that last match - the computer choose its moves based on what would path would lead to victory. This may make sense in the short term, but sometimes the only way to win is not to play at all;).
Anyhoo, I wanted to write a short note about gameplay. You don't want a game that people can't win - eventually players will become fustrated and give up. Its pointless to have a game that's impossible to defeat because while people like a challenge, people also like victory. You don't make it too easy on one hand, but you don't put them up against something that is completly impossible.
BLeh. I suppose all this processing power will give us the next best thing in orgasmic graphic reality. Woop. Someone should hit these people on the head and tell them that I want to play a game that is fun once and a while too. You know, pong is really fun and it doesn't need much more than a C64 to run either... in fact, a C64 would be too much power for Pong...
Give me Tradewars 2002 over Quake 3 anyday. Give me LORD over Diablo. Give me fun or give me something else.:)
I find that info about "soverign citizenship" interesting. Though I'm not American (IANAA) and not a lawyer (IANAL), I'd imagine that it'd be very easy for the MPAA or RIAA to shut you down.
Many people have said similar things: quit your resident status, snub your nose at the government, incorporate offshore, etc, but don't forget that your bandwidth has to come from somewhere. They'll just go after your ISP and (IANAL) force them to stop providing contributory(sp) infringement. Gee.. thats what Napster is being taken down with. Your ISP would be contributing to your infringement and would be required to stop providing bandwith. Even if you held an offshore ISP, someone will start blocking your US traffic (which doesn't matter to me, though).
I really think you guys should sit back, take a stress pill, and think things over before you react. Dave? Can you hear me Dave? I can feel it. I can feel it. I can fe... Now starting Windows 95.
I don't have a social life:. it does not affect my career decisions. Bah. Thats nonsense. Not having a social life _can_ affect my decisions because I seem to prefer an environment where fridays are not launch-pads to weekend parties. I also prefer to work and not chatter about lifes little problems. But hey... thats me. Whatever floats your boat.
You can sell (transfer ownership) property and services. This includes packaging, support, manuals, media, shipping & handling, manufacturing, creation, duplication, R&D, and other such fees. What the GPL says, however, is that any code derived from GPL'd code must be licensed at no charge - you got it free so it should remain that way. This means that you can't restrict a third party from improving and distributing those improvements (in fact, they are bound by the same terms that you are bound by).
Very interesting that the largest company that lives on IP rights is strongly against something that gives them away so freely. Very interesting indeed. ---
a=b;a^2=ab;a^2-b^2=ab-b^2;(a-b)(a+b)=b(a-b);a+b=b; 2b=b;2=1
The real confusion is between selling and licensing. Microsoft does NOT sell Windows to consumers, it LICENSES it to them. Redhat does not SELL you Linux, it sells you manuals and support and LICENSES their distribution to you. It so happens that the license is free but the extras are not.
Difference? You betcha. If I _sold_ something to you, that immediatly gives you the right to do pretty much anything you want with it (as long as you don't violate copyrights, trademarks, patents, or state laws). However, if I _license_ something to you, I can dictate whatever terms I want and I get to set the rules about what you can and cannot do with my product. The GPL strives, as I see it, to give the licensee as many rights as possible without damaging the rights or intention of the creators.
People really need to understand this difference. A lot of people still don't understand that they do not own that copy of Windows that's on their computer. It's owned by Microsoft and licensed to them. Linux users also need to understand that the creators of Linux have agreed to license them Linux at no cost (and considerable more rights than Microsoft gives).
Now what do the differences mean? That's a subjective interpretation that, if I were to mention, would get me a steaming hot pile of flame. no thanks.
I believe that I have rights when I pay for anything that is not physical. Just like a service, they are accountable to me in terms of ownership. However, I also believe that the people who create content must be rewarded for their efforts. I should not have the right to dictate to someone else how they release their creative content. If they give it to me... fine. if they sell it to me... fine. THEIR CHOICE, not mine.
I will agree that the MPAA goes a bit too far. When I buy a DVD, I want to be able to do ANYTHING I WANT with it - including, and especially, decrypting it so that I may play it on my Linux PC (since they seem to not want to license any players with a key).
What a lot of people seem to forget is that someone worked very hard in creating something and should be able to decide how their stuff is sold. Whats worse than the MPAA is the way that the music industry sucks the life and money from artists.
I believe in a Napster-like system where payment for music goes to the ARTISTS (and then a cut going to the record companies for their service to the artist). What record companies forget is that they are providing a service to the Artist, and not the other way around. The artist should pay them for services rendered... instead it has become a state of the label 'owning' the artist through anal agreements.
Back to the subject at hand, subscription-ware affecting OEM dealers, you can see that Microsoft wants to control consumers and dictate what we buy. Lets look at the way 'normal' buisness works and then look at the Microsoft way. A normal consumer oriented buisness will manufacture a product and SELL the resulting product to wholesalers or distributors who, in turn, sell their product to consumers. Microsoft does this partially, by signing off all support to the OEM, but retains the rights to all the stuff that leaves their factories. It doesn't make sense. It doesn't help when the OEMs sit back and get fat off a small markup on Windows (and a large one on hardware). Currently there is a downtrend in PC sales - everyone and their mother now has a PC. OEMs aren't buying as many licenses for Windows because they aren't selling as much anymore. But Microsoft is doing an end-run around them by selling upgrades in stores. The consumer upgrades the OS and the company that sold them the PC w/OS gets nothing. Furthermore, Microsoft knows that most consumers rely on Windows so much so that they force silly things like monthly subscriptions. Sure, they'll say you get free bug fixes (which we do now) and new features at no extra cost. Ummm.. at no extra cost from the monthly fee. I don't think Windows is worth even $10/month let alone what they are planning to charge.
Now read my wording carefully here:
End users get ripped off, content creators FEEL ripped off, and standing in the middle is the content providers. This is a perfect analogy for the movie and music industry - where artists get ripped off and exploited by mega companies (and the mpaa). In the software world, though, Microsoft is both a creator and provider. They are trying to now dominate the entire industry and dictate to others how to create, distribute, and innovate.
If your government lets this.NET thing happen, it could spell doom for true innovation. However it could presumeably add to the software liberty movement (I prefer not to be flamed about which one is best) by forcing people to realize that they don't have to pay for software.
I'm sorry that I wasted your time, please forgive my rambling nature... also, the left shift key of this terminal seems to be broken. I have to use the right one and it just feels wrong and has added to my irritation level. Please accept my apologies if this text seems ranting and raving.
I would like to also apologize for the above apology (for this one as well).
a=b (ok)
a^2=ab (ok, both sides *a)
a^2-b^2=ab-b^2 (ok, both sides -b^2)
(a-b)(a+b)=b(a-b) (ok, simple factoring)
to get to the next step a+b=b, we must divide out (a-b). Now, this is all good and fine if we forget for a moment that those letters actually represent something.
I like using it as a sig, because it reminds me to always look at the little details. Because if you ignore them, they can come back to bite you in the ass.;)
Heh.. I still use Wp5.1 for Dos. I love it. Works great. Even when I'm in Windows, I prefer "EDIT" to notepad and Word. ---
a=b;a^2=ab;a^2-b^2=ab-b^2;(a-b)(a+b)=b(a-b);a+b=b; 2b=b;2=1
Yeah.. So Microsoft turns around and says "if you don't pay we'll cut you off."
Suddenly all those Word documents and Excel spreadsheets that you saved on DriveSpace.NET are useless to you. Yeah, StarOffice supports Word docs, but will it support Word.NET docs?
AFAIK, its a big ASP (application service provider, not.asp) type system where you need to connect to Microsoft in order to use their software.
Pros:
* you always have the latest software
* free bug fixes
* easier to protect against piracy
* ummm
Cons:
* Everything is controlled and run by Microsoft
* Central distribution of software (yuck).
* Monthly payments
* Loss of freedom
* Microsoft can watch everything you do...
It's 6am... do you know if the.net servers are up? ---
a=b;a^2=ab;a^2-b^2=ab-b^2;(a-b)(a+b)=b(a-b);a+b=b; 2b=b;2=1
I'm sorry, net://word.microsoft.com is temporarily unavalable to serve your request. We apologize for this temporary interruption of service and any damage to your buisness that this may cause. We're so sorry that the critical document you needed is only accessable by our software, and we're sorry that there is really nothing you can do about it. I think you should get an account on workopolis.com or monster.com, because once the boss sees that you were the one who insisted on purchasing.net, you'll be the first to go.
I think it all comes down to the end consumer wanting at least the feeling of owning something. I mean, you fork over upwards of $3,000 for a new PC and what do you get? Some hardware that won't do jack shit without software. You own the hardware (physically, so you can sell it, trade it, give it away, etc, but aren't supposed to reverse engineer it and clone it - but you can) but you do not own the software. Somehow they managed to rip the pages out of the book...
Let me explain why a computer is very much like a book. When you buy a book, you own that copy. You can, if you choose, give it to someone as a gift, sell it at a garage sale (eg. private non-commercial sale), rip it to shreds, and/or read it. You can do any of these things in any order you choose (eg. read it and then rip it up) and the author/publisher has very little to say about it. However, you have no rights in terms of the contents of the book - thats copyrighted, and you do not own it. Computers, otoh, you own the hardware and can do what you please with it. Like a book without pages, however, the computer is pretty much useless without software. Using the book analogy, and as an honest computer owner, you could do what you like so long as you do not duplicate the software without permission (just like the book, and this is very fair).
Microsoft will have you believe that the software is more important than the hardware and thus justifies a subscription service. They are partially correct in that you need an operating system to do anything other than look at the blinking lights and listening to the whirring fans of the hardware. I wouldn't mind it if it were an option; perhaps make WindowsXPUpdate a subscription service (although, one wonders why the customer has to pay MS for fixes to their buggy software)...
I guess what people are really upset about is the fact that Microsoft wants its customers to pay for the bugs in Windows. Yes, Windows is not perfect but it is widely used. Yes, Windows ME did include SOME new features not available in Windows 98. It is, however, debatable if these _new_features_ were worth the upgrade cost - you decide that when and if you decide to purchase the upgrade. Some people are still on 95, because it does what they need it to do, and Microsoft is fuming about this. They want you to constantly update and feed their R&D engine so they may engrain themselves deeper into our computers and our pocketbooks. Now Microsoft sees a chance to force consumers to pay and pay and pay for the rest of eternity... Hrmm... I guess the so-called "Microsoft tax" (per computer) is fast becomming a monthly tax. Geez.
I think the thing to do is for every Windows user to record each time Windows crashes. At the end of each month, send a bill to Redmond. Lets see who laughs when consumers start holding them responsable for the crap they want us to pay for. ---
a=b;a^2=ab;a^2-b^2=ab-b^2;(a-b)(a+b)=b(a-b);a+b=b; 2b=b;2=1
Slashdot Mirror
My opinion:
; 2b=b;2=1
This DVD needs a better mini-series.
End of story.
---
a=b;a^2=ab;a^2-b^2=ab-b^2;(a-b)(a+b)=b(a-b);a+b=b
b does NOT equal 0...
:. a - b = 0
/(a-b) is equivlant to /0. not because b=0. Not because b MIGHT be zero. but becuase NO MATTER WHAT a or b is, a - b is always going to be zero.
; 2b=b;2=1
a = b
We don't know (nor do we care) what a or b is because the factoring part
I need a new sig.. my current one is just confising too many people.
---
a=b;a^2=ab;a^2-b^2=ab-b^2;(a-b)(a+b)=b(a-b);a+b=b
2b = b
; 2b=b;2=1
if you divide both sides by b then
2 = 1
--
but since you obviously failed algebra, I'll let you figure out the REAL problem (hint: watch where the common factor is divided out about halfway through - the common factor removed is a-b).
:P
---
a=b;a^2=ab;a^2-b^2=ab-b^2;(a-b)(a+b)=b(a-b);a+b=b
Someone came out a year or two ago and said "all hail the wonderous Internet." Many companies become overnight succeeses without actually doing much other than contributing to the hype bandwagon. Now everyone has seen these companies for what they are, they are pulling the funding. What was so hot is now back to normal and progressing as it was before it got hyped like mad.
; 2b=b;2=1
I say wait a month or two and let these companies recede from the net. They were never really wanted anyway and they never did much either.
How does this affect employment? Once the companies that were in it for the cash are gone, better jobs will be available as other sectors realize what the Internet can do for them. P2P is opening up new horizons already and there is no telling what will come next. Computers and Networks are still in their infancy. Getting rid of the crap companies is one step closer to maturing the online world.
With better companies doing business online we'll have better job opportinities that are (1) more challenging and (2) more rewarding to the people in the positions. More money? maybe. I think we'll start seeing those level out to average (or moderatly high) income levels - and not the absurd levels they have been in the past.
Or something like that.
---
a=b;a^2=ab;a^2-b^2=ab-b^2;(a-b)(a+b)=b(a-b);a+b=b
We have plenty of people here with lots of good (and not so good) ideas about where the Internet should be headed. No matter what you idea is, however, if no one is ready to take the risk from your venture then you are headed nowhere. To a certain extent, VALinux has taken a lot of the risk for many Linux oriented websites and backed them with a physical buisness model - selling hardware. Many websites, for example, are personally owned and operated - leaving the webmaster wide open to all sorts of troubles. Even people who have released code under the GPL are now (in some places under some laws) facing the possiblity of being held liable for their software.
; 2b=b;2=1
We need to be able to do things without fearing the legal reprocussions of those actions. While we can't take this too far, certainly we should be free to experiment with new ideas in technology and software. We need lots of places like Slashdot and Fuckedcompany where people are free to voice their opinions without getting reamed by the courts.
We also need people to wake up from the pipe dream that the Internet is some magical place where anything is possible. Certainly there are a lot of possibilities, but not everything can be done. That engineers' addage about being able to do things but not knowing when not to do it comes into play... or is that a scientist thing. Whatever. Banner ads, for instance, are one thing that is not working. We need to go back and re-think them to figure out a better way of generating revenue for websites.
Bah. I've forgotten what I was going to say. Maybe I said it and, if I did, thats great... what are you looking at? Scram sam.
---
a=b;a^2=ab;a^2-b^2=ab-b^2;(a-b)(a+b)=b(a-b);a+b=b
I really think you guys should sit back, take a stress pill, and think things over before you react. Dave? Can you hear me Dave? I can feel it. I can feel it. I can fe... Now starting Windows 95.
; 2b=b;2=1
---
a=b;a^2=ab;a^2-b^2=ab-b^2;(a-b)(a+b)=b(a-b);a+b=b
The game I'm waiting for is the game that lets you enter a complete virtual world and do essentially anything you want. There would be stories and quests and things that you could go on, but I'd want to experience that fat lazy guy sitting at home watching the TV... wait a minute... nevermind. Anyhow, I want something that is like TradeWars (the new upgraded one doesn't impress me) where you can be good or evil. Something like a StarWars MMORPG where you get to play the stormtroopers - just for shits and giggles I suppose.
; 2b=b;2=1
Most games now-a-days rely on repetition and call it "skill." True, zerg-rushing a terran base is simple enough, but a real skill would be one of the zerg that are in the rush. Ever see how many of your little ones die in the attack and you win anyway? Wouldn't be much fun if you were amoung the first to die.
I like Rainbow six type games where, when you die, that's it. None of this die, respawn and try again bullshit. I want consequences. I want a game that if I fuck up I'm starting all over with nothing.
I'd love a game where AI characters come looking for you if you kill their boss... but not this shit of "all the AI guys rush in" once you do it. I want the bad guys to have lives. I love hitman for the way it plays so realistically with the AI characters but I hate the way they have set patterns. I might like it better if they told the character to start at point A and, however way they feel, get to point B. Then I have to get them but I don't know exactly where they are - makes it more of a challenge. Makes it more interesting.
What are you looking at?
---
a=b;a^2=ab;a^2-b^2=ab-b^2;(a-b)(a+b)=b(a-b);a+b=b
Signal who?; 2b=b;2=1
---
a=b;a^2=ab;a^2-b^2=ab-b^2;(a-b)(a+b)=b(a-b);a+b=b
With the level of service @Home has been having recently, I've considered out-sourcing my bandwidth needs to FedEx. I figure that if I save packets to floppy disk and have them FedEx'd to the site, my total bandwidth will increase (think lots of floppies in one shipment) but my latency will be horrible (though not as bad as @home is right now).
; 2b=b;2=1
;)
---
a=b;a^2=ab;a^2-b^2=ab-b^2;(a-b)(a+b)=b(a-b);a+b=b
link; 2b=b;2=1
---
a=b;a^2=ab;a^2-b^2=ab-b^2;(a-b)(a+b)=b(a-b);a+b=b
You meann 2- the-beginning.html
; 2b=b;2=1
http://www.adcritic.com/content/sony-playstatio
---
a=b;a^2=ab;a^2-b^2=ab-b^2;(a-b)(a+b)=b(a-b);a+b=b
I was reminded about the objective of the deep blue chess thing against that grandmaster whats-his-name. They dedicated so much time and effort to one single end - having a computer defeat a human player. In the end, the computer did very well, only because it was able to compute much faster than the human opponent - although the human opponent they used was very good with strategy and playing the game. I still think the computer got lucky when he surrendered on that last match - the computer choose its moves based on what would path would lead to victory. This may make sense in the short term, but sometimes the only way to win is not to play at all ;).
:)
; 2b=b;2=1
Anyhoo, I wanted to write a short note about gameplay. You don't want a game that people can't win - eventually players will become fustrated and give up. Its pointless to have a game that's impossible to defeat because while people like a challenge, people also like victory. You don't make it too easy on one hand, but you don't put them up against something that is completly impossible.
BLeh. I suppose all this processing power will give us the next best thing in orgasmic graphic reality. Woop. Someone should hit these people on the head and tell them that I want to play a game that is fun once and a while too. You know, pong is really fun and it doesn't need much more than a C64 to run either... in fact, a C64 would be too much power for Pong...
Give me Tradewars 2002 over Quake 3 anyday. Give me LORD over Diablo. Give me fun or give me something else.
Ignore this post if you think I'm an idoit. I am.
---
a=b;a^2=ab;a^2-b^2=ab-b^2;(a-b)(a+b)=b(a-b);a+b=b
I find that info about "soverign citizenship" interesting. Though I'm not American (IANAA) and not a lawyer (IANAL), I'd imagine that it'd be very easy for the MPAA or RIAA to shut you down.
; 2b=b;2=1
Many people have said similar things: quit your resident status, snub your nose at the government, incorporate offshore, etc, but don't forget that your bandwidth has to come from somewhere. They'll just go after your ISP and (IANAL) force them to stop providing contributory(sp) infringement. Gee.. thats what Napster is being taken down with. Your ISP would be contributing to your infringement and would be required to stop providing bandwith. Even if you held an offshore ISP, someone will start blocking your US traffic (which doesn't matter to me, though).
I really think you guys should sit back, take a stress pill, and think things over before you react. Dave? Can you hear me Dave? I can feel it. I can feel it. I can fe... Now starting Windows 95.
---
a=b;a^2=ab;a^2-b^2=ab-b^2;(a-b)(a+b)=b(a-b);a+b=b
I'm rarely here. In fact, I'm not here right now. You are simply imagining this post. It does not exist. It is only in your mind.
:P You caught me.
; 2b=b;2=1
Bah.
I meant that I have no life IRL. I seem to thrive on-line while I goof off off-line.
booYeah.
---
a=b;a^2=ab;a^2-b^2=ab-b^2;(a-b)(a+b)=b(a-b);a+b=b
I don't have a social life :. it does not affect my career decisions. Bah. Thats nonsense. Not having a social life _can_ affect my decisions because I seem to prefer an environment where fridays are not launch-pads to weekend parties. I also prefer to work and not chatter about lifes little problems. But hey... thats me. Whatever floats your boat.
; 2b=b;2=1
;P
---
a=b;a^2=ab;a^2-b^2=ab-b^2;(a-b)(a+b)=b(a-b);a+b=b
You can sell (transfer ownership) property and services. This includes packaging, support, manuals, media, shipping & handling, manufacturing, creation, duplication, R&D, and other such fees. What the GPL says, however, is that any code derived from GPL'd code must be licensed at no charge - you got it free so it should remain that way. This means that you can't restrict a third party from improving and distributing those improvements (in fact, they are bound by the same terms that you are bound by).
; 2b=b;2=1
Very interesting that the largest company that lives on IP rights is strongly against something that gives them away so freely. Very interesting indeed.
---
a=b;a^2=ab;a^2-b^2=ab-b^2;(a-b)(a+b)=b(a-b);a+b=b
The real confusion is between selling and licensing. Microsoft does NOT sell Windows to consumers, it LICENSES it to them. Redhat does not SELL you Linux, it sells you manuals and support and LICENSES their distribution to you. It so happens that the license is free but the extras are not.
; 2b=b;2=1
Difference? You betcha. If I _sold_ something to you, that immediatly gives you the right to do pretty much anything you want with it (as long as you don't violate copyrights, trademarks, patents, or state laws). However, if I _license_ something to you, I can dictate whatever terms I want and I get to set the rules about what you can and cannot do with my product. The GPL strives, as I see it, to give the licensee as many rights as possible without damaging the rights or intention of the creators.
People really need to understand this difference. A lot of people still don't understand that they do not own that copy of Windows that's on their computer. It's owned by Microsoft and licensed to them. Linux users also need to understand that the creators of Linux have agreed to license them Linux at no cost (and considerable more rights than Microsoft gives).
Now what do the differences mean? That's a subjective interpretation that, if I were to mention, would get me a steaming hot pile of flame. no thanks.
---
a=b;a^2=ab;a^2-b^2=ab-b^2;(a-b)(a+b)=b(a-b);a+b=b
I believe that I have rights when I pay for anything that is not physical. Just like a service, they are accountable to me in terms of ownership. However, I also believe that the people who create content must be rewarded for their efforts. I should not have the right to dictate to someone else how they release their creative content. If they give it to me... fine. if they sell it to me... fine. THEIR CHOICE, not mine.
.NET thing happen, it could spell doom for true innovation. However it could presumeably add to the software liberty movement (I prefer not to be flamed about which one is best) by forcing people to realize that they don't have to pay for software.
; 2b=b;2=1
I will agree that the MPAA goes a bit too far. When I buy a DVD, I want to be able to do ANYTHING I WANT with it - including, and especially, decrypting it so that I may play it on my Linux PC (since they seem to not want to license any players with a key).
What a lot of people seem to forget is that someone worked very hard in creating something and should be able to decide how their stuff is sold. Whats worse than the MPAA is the way that the music industry sucks the life and money from artists.
I believe in a Napster-like system where payment for music goes to the ARTISTS (and then a cut going to the record companies for their service to the artist). What record companies forget is that they are providing a service to the Artist, and not the other way around. The artist should pay them for services rendered... instead it has become a state of the label 'owning' the artist through anal agreements.
Back to the subject at hand, subscription-ware affecting OEM dealers, you can see that Microsoft wants to control consumers and dictate what we buy. Lets look at the way 'normal' buisness works and then look at the Microsoft way. A normal consumer oriented buisness will manufacture a product and SELL the resulting product to wholesalers or distributors who, in turn, sell their product to consumers. Microsoft does this partially, by signing off all support to the OEM, but retains the rights to all the stuff that leaves their factories. It doesn't make sense. It doesn't help when the OEMs sit back and get fat off a small markup on Windows (and a large one on hardware). Currently there is a downtrend in PC sales - everyone and their mother now has a PC. OEMs aren't buying as many licenses for Windows because they aren't selling as much anymore. But Microsoft is doing an end-run around them by selling upgrades in stores. The consumer upgrades the OS and the company that sold them the PC w/OS gets nothing. Furthermore, Microsoft knows that most consumers rely on Windows so much so that they force silly things like monthly subscriptions. Sure, they'll say you get free bug fixes (which we do now) and new features at no extra cost. Ummm.. at no extra cost from the monthly fee. I don't think Windows is worth even $10/month let alone what they are planning to charge.
Now read my wording carefully here:
End users get ripped off, content creators FEEL ripped off, and standing in the middle is the content providers. This is a perfect analogy for the movie and music industry - where artists get ripped off and exploited by mega companies (and the mpaa). In the software world, though, Microsoft is both a creator and provider. They are trying to now dominate the entire industry and dictate to others how to create, distribute, and innovate.
If your government lets this
I'm sorry that I wasted your time, please forgive my rambling nature... also, the left shift key of this terminal seems to be broken. I have to use the right one and it just feels wrong and has added to my irritation level. Please accept my apologies if this text seems ranting and raving.
I would like to also apologize for the above apology (for this one as well).
---
a=b;a^2=ab;a^2-b^2=ab-b^2;(a-b)(a+b)=b(a-b);a+b=b
a=b (ok)
;)
; 2b=b;2=1
a^2=ab (ok, both sides *a)
a^2-b^2=ab-b^2 (ok, both sides -b^2)
(a-b)(a+b)=b(a-b) (ok, simple factoring)
to get to the next step a+b=b, we must divide out (a-b). Now, this is all good and fine if we forget for a moment that those letters actually represent something.
I like using it as a sig, because it reminds me to always look at the little details. Because if you ignore them, they can come back to bite you in the ass.
---
a=b;a^2=ab;a^2-b^2=ab-b^2;(a-b)(a+b)=b(a-b);a+b=b
Heh.. I still use Wp5.1 for Dos. I love it. Works great. Even when I'm in Windows, I prefer "EDIT" to notepad and Word.; 2b=b;2=1
---
a=b;a^2=ab;a^2-b^2=ab-b^2;(a-b)(a+b)=b(a-b);a+b=b
Yeah.. So Microsoft turns around and says "if you don't pay we'll cut you off."
Suddenly all those Word documents and Excel spreadsheets that you saved on DriveSpace.NET are useless to you. Yeah, StarOffice supports Word docs, but will it support Word.NET docs?
---
a=b;a^2=ab;a^2-b^2=ab-b^2;(a-b)(a+b)=b(a-b);a+b=b
---
a=b;a^2=ab;a^2-b^2=ab-b^2;(a-b)(a+b)=b(a-b);a+b=b
AFAIK, its a big ASP (application service provider, not .asp) type system where you need to connect to Microsoft in order to use their software.
.net servers are up?; 2b=b;2=1
Pros:
* you always have the latest software
* free bug fixes
* easier to protect against piracy
* ummm
Cons:
* Everything is controlled and run by Microsoft
* Central distribution of software (yuck).
* Monthly payments
* Loss of freedom
* Microsoft can watch everything you do...
It's 6am... do you know if the
---
a=b;a^2=ab;a^2-b^2=ab-b^2;(a-b)(a+b)=b(a-b);a+b=b
I'm sorry, net://word.microsoft.com is temporarily unavalable to serve your request. We apologize for this temporary interruption of service and any damage to your buisness that this may cause. We're so sorry that the critical document you needed is only accessable by our software, and we're sorry that there is really nothing you can do about it. I think you should get an account on workopolis.com or monster.com, because once the boss sees that you were the one who insisted on purchasing .net, you'll be the first to go.
; 2b=b;2=1
Have a nice day.
--
it's funny.. laugh.
.
---
a=b;a^2=ab;a^2-b^2=ab-b^2;(a-b)(a+b)=b(a-b);a+b=b
I think it all comes down to the end consumer wanting at least the feeling of owning something. I mean, you fork over upwards of $3,000 for a new PC and what do you get? Some hardware that won't do jack shit without software. You own the hardware (physically, so you can sell it, trade it, give it away, etc, but aren't supposed to reverse engineer it and clone it - but you can) but you do not own the software. Somehow they managed to rip the pages out of the book...
; 2b=b;2=1
Let me explain why a computer is very much like a book. When you buy a book, you own that copy. You can, if you choose, give it to someone as a gift, sell it at a garage sale (eg. private non-commercial sale), rip it to shreds, and/or read it. You can do any of these things in any order you choose (eg. read it and then rip it up) and the author/publisher has very little to say about it. However, you have no rights in terms of the contents of the book - thats copyrighted, and you do not own it. Computers, otoh, you own the hardware and can do what you please with it. Like a book without pages, however, the computer is pretty much useless without software. Using the book analogy, and as an honest computer owner, you could do what you like so long as you do not duplicate the software without permission (just like the book, and this is very fair).
Microsoft will have you believe that the software is more important than the hardware and thus justifies a subscription service. They are partially correct in that you need an operating system to do anything other than look at the blinking lights and listening to the whirring fans of the hardware. I wouldn't mind it if it were an option; perhaps make WindowsXPUpdate a subscription service (although, one wonders why the customer has to pay MS for fixes to their buggy software)...
I guess what people are really upset about is the fact that Microsoft wants its customers to pay for the bugs in Windows. Yes, Windows is not perfect but it is widely used. Yes, Windows ME did include SOME new features not available in Windows 98. It is, however, debatable if these _new_features_ were worth the upgrade cost - you decide that when and if you decide to purchase the upgrade. Some people are still on 95, because it does what they need it to do, and Microsoft is fuming about this. They want you to constantly update and feed their R&D engine so they may engrain themselves deeper into our computers and our pocketbooks. Now Microsoft sees a chance to force consumers to pay and pay and pay for the rest of eternity... Hrmm... I guess the so-called "Microsoft tax" (per computer) is fast becomming a monthly tax. Geez.
I think the thing to do is for every Windows user to record each time Windows crashes. At the end of each month, send a bill to Redmond. Lets see who laughs when consumers start holding them responsable for the crap they want us to pay for.
---
a=b;a^2=ab;a^2-b^2=ab-b^2;(a-b)(a+b)=b(a-b);a+b=b