When a law finally makes it's way through all the courts and the Supreme Court finds it unconstitutional how about putting *every single last bastard* who voted for it on trial for treason?
Um, that probably won't work because they wouldn't be guilty of it. Treason is defined in the US Constitution (the only crime to be so defined), and this ain't it. Not saying I'm happy about what these guys are doing, but there's no way you can twist the definition of treason to cover it.
Acknowledging that you've built on the work of those who came before you is universal and goes back before recorded history. What I was talking about was the specific imagery of standing on your predecessors' shoulders.
I don't think you quite understand. It's not practical, not because of technical reasons, but because the banks aren't interested in not charging you money.
It's not so much conceding the feasibility, as it is that the courts tend to take a black and white view of any communications carrier's responsibilities. Either you're responsible for what goes over the communication channels or not. If you don't fool with any of your customer's communications, that's cool. You haven't taken responsibility for the content, and you can't be held accountable for it. But the minute you start censoring people's messages, then you've picked up that ball and it's yours now. You have to take responsibility for it, 100%.
Because the legislature can rewrite the laws out from under you, which would make your court judgment so much toilet paper. Australia doesn't have a Bill of Rights; if the legislature passes a law that says, "This is the way it is," the court doesn't have any choice but to agree.
You can laugh...but I've read articles on the issue from people who apparently hold exactly this position: that if girls and women aren't interested in tech, then we must find out how to *make* them interested, starting in the preteens.
I think he's trying to reference Newton's statement "If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I have stood on the shoulders of giants."
I can see where he got confused; Galileo was in fact one of the "giants" Newton was referencing in the quote (Kepler was another). The great thing about that quote is that it's actually a stealth insult. Newton wrote it to a rival named Robert Hooke, who was somewhat, um, short. That exact wording is Newton's, and it is the best known expression of the thought, but the metaphor predates Newton considerably; the earliest known example of it was by Bernard of Chartres around 1130, and it was commonly used throughout the Middle Ages and Renaissance.
Retailer costs can drop, but most retailers still need to make a profit, even selling ebooks (servers cost money).
Servers cost money, yes, but not even close to what a physical presence selling physical items costs. Look at what Amazon has done to physical books already simply by making much of their retail presence virtual, and they still have to handle and deliver physical books there. As a wild ass guess, I'd say selling e-books online cuts retailer costs down to maybe $2, including profit. Now your ebook sells for about $11.50. I am firmly convinced that Amazon is making a profit at $15. It sure as hell doesn't cost $20 to sell an e-book online.
No, I don't think multiplayer should be unlockable. But if you're totally lost in multiplayer and never played the single-player campaign, you've got nobody to blame but yourself. Granted, this doesn't solve the pain of other players having to deal with someone who has no clue and won't learn.
Then where are the people with "1", who actually did just buy a copy an hour ago, supposed to play in order to learn how to play the game?
Well, that is one of the things the single-player campaign is supposed to do. It starts with beginner tutorials, and if you can finish it, you should have a basic level of competence. Experienced online players will probably still squash you like a bug, but you won't be totally lost.
MySQL they arguably have an interest in killing, as they could regard it as a competitor to Oracle; that's why all the talk was about MySQL. Solaris and SPARC less so. I think that they're envisioning selling a self-contained box on which they own all the pieces, for which they need Solaris and SPARC to stay around.
This article is NOT pointless, especially when you consider that the password is the ESN.
For about 10 seconds, then I finish changing it. Why would I trust their unknown password generation process when I can use apg, which I *know* generates random passwords?
Owning a Mi-Fi myself (although Sprint, not Verizon), this article was worrying me a bit. But it looks like you can only get bit by it if you're a moron. Reconfiguring the SSID and encryption keys is of course the very first thing I do with any Wi-Fi access point. No worries.
Let's see here: The RIAA has demonstrated that they can roast you slowly in court for years, costing you many thousands in lawyer's fees, and get a dismissal which costs them nothing and allows them to sue you for the exact same thing all over again! Yep, they're in trouble now...
Slashdot Mirror
Um, that probably won't work because they wouldn't be guilty of it. Treason is defined in the US Constitution (the only crime to be so defined), and this ain't it. Not saying I'm happy about what these guys are doing, but there's no way you can twist the definition of treason to cover it.
Acknowledging that you've built on the work of those who came before you is universal and goes back before recorded history. What I was talking about was the specific imagery of standing on your predecessors' shoulders.
I don't think you quite understand. It's not practical, not because of technical reasons, but because the banks aren't interested in not charging you money.
It's not so much conceding the feasibility, as it is that the courts tend to take a black and white view of any communications carrier's responsibilities. Either you're responsible for what goes over the communication channels or not. If you don't fool with any of your customer's communications, that's cool. You haven't taken responsibility for the content, and you can't be held accountable for it. But the minute you start censoring people's messages, then you've picked up that ball and it's yours now. You have to take responsibility for it, 100%.
Because the legislature can rewrite the laws out from under you, which would make your court judgment so much toilet paper. Australia doesn't have a Bill of Rights; if the legislature passes a law that says, "This is the way it is," the court doesn't have any choice but to agree.
You can laugh...but I've read articles on the issue from people who apparently hold exactly this position: that if girls and women aren't interested in tech, then we must find out how to *make* them interested, starting in the preteens.
I can see where he got confused; Galileo was in fact one of the "giants" Newton was referencing in the quote (Kepler was another). The great thing about that quote is that it's actually a stealth insult. Newton wrote it to a rival named Robert Hooke, who was somewhat, um, short. That exact wording is Newton's, and it is the best known expression of the thought, but the metaphor predates Newton considerably; the earliest known example of it was by Bernard of Chartres around 1130, and it was commonly used throughout the Middle Ages and Renaissance.
I still haven't gotten the hang of the Laser Rooks and Transforming Bishops yet.
Servers cost money, yes, but not even close to what a physical presence selling physical items costs. Look at what Amazon has done to physical books already simply by making much of their retail presence virtual, and they still have to handle and deliver physical books there. As a wild ass guess, I'd say selling e-books online cuts retailer costs down to maybe $2, including profit. Now your ebook sells for about $11.50. I am firmly convinced that Amazon is making a profit at $15. It sure as hell doesn't cost $20 to sell an e-book online.
No, I don't think multiplayer should be unlockable. But if you're totally lost in multiplayer and never played the single-player campaign, you've got nobody to blame but yourself. Granted, this doesn't solve the pain of other players having to deal with someone who has no clue and won't learn.
Well, that is one of the things the single-player campaign is supposed to do. It starts with beginner tutorials, and if you can finish it, you should have a basic level of competence. Experienced online players will probably still squash you like a bug, but you won't be totally lost.
The LHC is the Duke Nukem of high-energy physics.
MySQL they arguably have an interest in killing, as they could regard it as a competitor to Oracle; that's why all the talk was about MySQL. Solaris and SPARC less so. I think that they're envisioning selling a self-contained box on which they own all the pieces, for which they need Solaris and SPARC to stay around.
Are you kidding? Have you ever talked to any RuneScape players?
For about 10 seconds, then I finish changing it. Why would I trust their unknown password generation process when I can use apg, which I *know* generates random passwords?
Owning a Mi-Fi myself (although Sprint, not Verizon), this article was worrying me a bit. But it looks like you can only get bit by it if you're a moron. Reconfiguring the SSID and encryption keys is of course the very first thing I do with any Wi-Fi access point. No worries.
Let's see here: The RIAA has demonstrated that they can roast you slowly in court for years, costing you many thousands in lawyer's fees, and get a dismissal which costs them nothing and allows them to sue you for the exact same thing all over again! Yep, they're in trouble now...
Sounds good to me. Maybe someday they'll try it.
Which had nothing to do with making cars affordable, see as how Henry Ford introduced the Model T in 1908.
Very true.
Also true. They become more affordable without the need for government subsidies, I note.
True once more. So why does the government need to get involved, again?
But once the government subsidized them, they became widely availa...oh, wait.
In other words, the government should help fund cars that people don't want to buy.
If it's inevitable, I don't see why we need government money to speed it.
Well, of course you do. Otherwise you can't start building farms when foraging the berry bushes runs out.
United in their admiration for FunkyCaps.
The revolution will not be kosher!