So, your primary argument about why Google is foolish (nay, 'sophomoric') to consider auctioning off IPO shares via eBay is... that investment bank underwriters will be pissed off that they don't get a cut. That's all? Fine with me.
Are you a leading investment bank underwriter, by any chance? And if so, how do you manage to post to Slashdot between your 120-hour work week and your cocaine habit?
Google now is in quite desperate situation: their PageRank's are undermined by link spammers and bloggers
This is new? Ever since web-crawling search engines have existed, unscrupulous people have tried to trick them into displaying their page at the top of the results list. Google's PageRank algorithms will continue to evolve to counter this.
Yahoo! and Microsoft are actively developing their own search technologies
I'm sure they are, but that doesn't mean they're any good, or even that they'll EVER be any good. Google has a head start of several years; look for Y! and MS to make all the same mistakes Google made in the past over again, while Google continues to improve.
Look at me, I'm just going to go buy a car and not worry about locking the doors or using a club, because I expect that the ignition system is tamper proof.
But would you buy a car that didn't even come with locks on the doors, and instead of needing a key to start the ignition you just had to press a big red button on the dashboard that says CAR GO NOW?
Microsoft isn't 100% responsible for making sure your Windows installation is secure. But at the same time, MS isn't ZERO percent responsible, either. They need to do their share.
The MPAA and RIAA for that mater promote 1st amendment rights. They advocate free speech for musicians and movie producers.
In a very superficial sense, yes. Those industry groups will fight for the right to make an excessively gory movie, or profanity-laced compact disc--if they think there's money to be made from them.
Wouldn't you like to hear what the major recording artists really think about the RIAA, though? Ever wonder why you never do?
Um, so sorry, but no one is going to tell me what I can or can not do with property that I posess.
Really?
It's perfectly legal to own a steak knife, but very illegal to use a steak knife to slit someone's throat.
One cannot be a socially responsible property owner without acknowledging that there are some legitimate restrictions on allowed usage. Are the restrictions defined by the DMCA excessively onerous? Certainly, but there's still valid precedent for laws that tell you what you can and can't do with your property.
Cigarettes the "most deadly and addictive recreational drug there is" -- oh lawdy, can you actually be serious?
Nicotine, more deadly than heroin? More addictive than crack cocaine? Not a chance. Are you perhaps using a definition of "recreational drug" that's customized to fit your conclusion.
Basically, your argument seems to be that we're losing the War on Drugs, so we should stop fighting it, and put a lot of resources into fighting a slightly different War or Drugs instead. I don't see the point.
my dog ate my collection of top-40 boy-bands, and sites like this exist only to allow me to make use of my protected right to a backup.
This is bullshit and you and I both know it.
Fair use protects your right for YOU to make a backup. It does not give you the right to procure another copy from someone else after your primary copy is damaged or destroyed.
Managed code will also repair your leaky faucets and give you all the candy in the universe!
I actually don't know anything about it, but I've heard all the promises about abstraction and platform-independence before, and never has a touted solution completely lived up to the hype.
in all fairness a large part of the virus-infection problem lies with the end user who clicks on every attachment they receive.
And Outlook is to blame for this, because it LETS THEM.
There is absolutely no reason to launch an executable file from an email attachment. If you attach a non-executable document file to an email, sure, let the application that filetype is associated with open it up from within Outlook, but any attempt to execute an EXE/COM/BAT/PIF/SCR file should result in 'not allowed.'
User security policies are only as good as what the system allows the user to get away with. A system that tells you DON'T DO THIS but then lets you do it anyway is worthless.
Make your blog read-only and the spam problem goes away.
Doesn't it?
Yes, but in many cases so also will the blog's audience go away.
One of the key atttractions of small-to-middle-sized weblogs is the interactivity. If the blog author says something incorrect, you can let him know. If you have additional information pertaining to something a blogger wrote about, you can share it with her.
Without comments, blogs are just another one-way communications medium. Not to say that's an undesirable thing, but we already have plenty of those.
Patents do not cover *concepts*; patents cover *methods*.
THANK you.
It's bad enough that Slashdot readers often confuse the issue when commenting on patent stories; we don't need the moderators making things worse by perpetuating the misconception right in the text of the story posting.
Hemos is getting to be nearly as bad as Michael at tacking on personal opinions to story submissions. I really wish the mods would let the submissions stand on their own merits.
Could you maybe tell us WHY it's "fraudulent" to include all the parts of the prehistoric plants that don't get turned into gasoline?
Take that away, and you've taken away the part of the figure that people can relate to. We all know what living plants look like, what with their water mass and their insoluble fiber. If you take only the stuff that becomes gasoline, what does that look like? Is that crude oil? I don't even know. Now THAT would be a meaningless statistic.
it doesn't matter how many dead, prehistoric plants were required to make the oil we use.
I disagree. No one would argue that oil is a renewable resource, but studies like these demonstrate just how much of a resource drain it is.
They could still flash "Buy Coke" every 180th frame, though. The message would show up once every 6 seconds or so, for a little less than 1/30th of a second.
The fun thing about keys is, you can have as many keys as you have mirt boxes - one goes missing, you remove the key from the receivers.
And there's at least one receiver at every traffic light in the city. How do you maintain the keylist on thousands of receivers -- do you send a ladder truck out and close down each intersection briefly? Do you wire the entire traffic grid for TCP/IP? Maybe install an 802.11 interface on every stoplight?
None of these solutions is particularly cost-effective. Easiest solution I can think of is to make possession of the light controllers illegal unless you're an emergency response vehicle, and embed an RFID in each transmitter right out of the factory so that those who possess one illegally can be caught.
Slashdot Mirror
So what is the point?
To see if it can be done?
(Kids these days, just don't grok the old-school hacker/tinkerer aesthetic... grumble grumble)
So, your primary argument about why Google is foolish (nay, 'sophomoric') to consider auctioning off IPO shares via eBay is... that investment bank underwriters will be pissed off that they don't get a cut. That's all? Fine with me.
Are you a leading investment bank underwriter, by any chance? And if so, how do you manage to post to Slashdot between your 120-hour work week and your cocaine habit?
Google now is in quite desperate situation: their PageRank's are undermined by link spammers and bloggers
This is new? Ever since web-crawling search engines have existed, unscrupulous people have tried to trick them into displaying their page at the top of the results list. Google's PageRank algorithms will continue to evolve to counter this.
Yahoo! and Microsoft are actively developing their own search technologies
I'm sure they are, but that doesn't mean they're any good, or even that they'll EVER be any good. Google has a head start of several years; look for Y! and MS to make all the same mistakes Google made in the past over again, while Google continues to improve.
Boy if MS ever gets into the firewall business :)
What do you mean, "if"?
Not exactly an enterprise-level solution, but still...
Look at me, I'm just going to go buy a car and not worry about locking the doors or using a club, because I expect that the ignition system is tamper proof.
But would you buy a car that didn't even come with locks on the doors, and instead of needing a key to start the ignition you just had to press a big red button on the dashboard that says CAR GO NOW?
Microsoft isn't 100% responsible for making sure your Windows installation is secure. But at the same time, MS isn't ZERO percent responsible, either. They need to do their share.
Television shows, and more generally, companies are not, I repeat, NOT citizens!
Boy, you're in for a shock when you get to page 2 of your Corporate Law textbook...
MENIS and MONAD products will be tightly integrated.
I'll give you 5 karma points if you can come up with a suitable acrostic definition for MULVA.
that will continue to be the case for as long as apple does not sell POS systems
I had a Mac LCII many years ago. That thing was a POS.
Just hope he is getting sued for blogging, period. That would be justice.
Dude, I hate to break this to you, but YOU'RE BLOGGING RIGHT NOW. Slashdot is a weblog.
There's a lot more to the medium than inane self-indulgent diary writing.
Who counts the paper ballots?
How can you be assured that biased vote-counters aren't surrepetitiously discarding or destroying ballots for candidates that they do not like?
The MPAA and RIAA for that mater promote 1st amendment rights. They advocate free speech for musicians and movie producers.
In a very superficial sense, yes. Those industry groups will fight for the right to make an excessively gory movie, or profanity-laced compact disc--if they think there's money to be made from them.
Wouldn't you like to hear what the major recording artists really think about the RIAA, though? Ever wonder why you never do?
Um, so sorry, but no one is going to tell me what I can or can not do with property that I posess.
Really?
It's perfectly legal to own a steak knife, but very illegal to use a steak knife to slit someone's throat.
One cannot be a socially responsible property owner without acknowledging that there are some legitimate restrictions on allowed usage. Are the restrictions defined by the DMCA excessively onerous? Certainly, but there's still valid precedent for laws that tell you what you can and can't do with your property.
MS should be made to host a free, high bandwidth FTP site that mirrors all of the current distributions of Linux and similar free OS software.
Also, Coke should be forced to include one can of Pepsi in every case, and Slashdot should be compelled to run banner ads for Microsoft products.
Cigarettes the "most deadly and addictive recreational drug there is" -- oh lawdy, can you actually be serious?
Nicotine, more deadly than heroin? More addictive than crack cocaine? Not a chance. Are you perhaps using a definition of "recreational drug" that's customized to fit your conclusion.
Basically, your argument seems to be that we're losing the War on Drugs, so we should stop fighting it, and put a lot of resources into fighting a slightly different War or Drugs instead. I don't see the point.
You don't have to buy it, some tech freaks will
Not even the tech freaks are buying the N-Gage, though.
To me this looks like another unsellable Nokia monstrosity. If I owned any Nokia stock, I'd be selling it.
It's hardly fair, but the DMCA already has a positive track record in this area
Okay, but the DMCA is a United States law, not an Australian law.
OFFTOPIC!
my dog ate my collection of top-40 boy-bands, and sites like this exist only to allow me to make use of my protected right to a backup.
This is bullshit and you and I both know it.
Fair use protects your right for YOU to make a backup. It does not give you the right to procure another copy from someone else after your primary copy is damaged or destroyed.
Managed code will also repair your leaky faucets and give you all the candy in the universe!
I actually don't know anything about it, but I've heard all the promises about abstraction and platform-independence before, and never has a touted solution completely lived up to the hype.
There is no such development panacea.
in all fairness a large part of the virus-infection problem lies with the end user who clicks on every attachment they receive.
And Outlook is to blame for this, because it LETS THEM.
There is absolutely no reason to launch an executable file from an email attachment. If you attach a non-executable document file to an email, sure, let the application that filetype is associated with open it up from within Outlook, but any attempt to execute an EXE/COM/BAT/PIF/SCR file should result in 'not allowed.'
User security policies are only as good as what the system allows the user to get away with. A system that tells you DON'T DO THIS but then lets you do it anyway is worthless.
Make your blog read-only and the spam problem goes away.
Doesn't it?
Yes, but in many cases so also will the blog's audience go away.
One of the key atttractions of small-to-middle-sized weblogs is the interactivity. If the blog author says something incorrect, you can let him know. If you have additional information pertaining to something a blogger wrote about, you can share it with her.
Without comments, blogs are just another one-way communications medium. Not to say that's an undesirable thing, but we already have plenty of those.
Patents do not cover *concepts*; patents cover *methods*.
THANK you.
It's bad enough that Slashdot readers often confuse the issue when commenting on patent stories; we don't need the moderators making things worse by perpetuating the misconception right in the text of the story posting.
Hemos is getting to be nearly as bad as Michael at tacking on personal opinions to story submissions. I really wish the mods would let the submissions stand on their own merits.
Could you maybe tell us WHY it's "fraudulent" to include all the parts of the prehistoric plants that don't get turned into gasoline?
Take that away, and you've taken away the part of the figure that people can relate to. We all know what living plants look like, what with their water mass and their insoluble fiber. If you take only the stuff that becomes gasoline, what does that look like? Is that crude oil? I don't even know. Now THAT would be a meaningless statistic.
it doesn't matter how many dead, prehistoric plants were required to make the oil we use.
I disagree. No one would argue that oil is a renewable resource, but studies like these demonstrate just how much of a resource drain it is.
Heard in Arthur Andersen's offices:
"Ohhh fuck! Everyone, shred your computers NOW!"
They could still flash "Buy Coke" every 180th frame, though. The message would show up once every 6 seconds or so, for a little less than 1/30th of a second.
The fun thing about keys is, you can have as many keys as you have mirt boxes - one goes missing, you remove the key from the receivers.
And there's at least one receiver at every traffic light in the city. How do you maintain the keylist on thousands of receivers -- do you send a ladder truck out and close down each intersection briefly? Do you wire the entire traffic grid for TCP/IP? Maybe install an 802.11 interface on every stoplight?
None of these solutions is particularly cost-effective. Easiest solution I can think of is to make possession of the light controllers illegal unless you're an emergency response vehicle, and embed an RFID in each transmitter right out of the factory so that those who possess one illegally can be caught.