Also a push into a potentially massive market -- almost-disposable commodity components running Linux.
If they can pull it off without summoning teh wrath of steveb they will look like an innovator and at least strengthen their brand. But they might cut themselves out of the margin, I can't imagine these would sell for much (not likely to be the next iPod in terms of revenue).
Maybe, are you offering me one?
Seriously tho, catch the net. The new terms are 'white hat' and 'black hat' or the ever-mysterious 'gray hat'. Hackers vs crackers is sooo 10 years ago.
Registered on Linux.com, never got an email confirmation, yet I can retrieve my username with the 'forgot username' form (confirmation that I didn't have a typo), but my account is locked out because it was never activated.
Rock on, linux.com.
So you must have some nice IP that you've developed... or maybe even a prototype of some kind of widget. Shop around, if someone is already interested, there should be more offers waiting for you. Your best option is probably to wait for those competing offers, or to seek them out when your company is ready.
What is this threshold anyway? Isn't it healthier to act out your aggression by playing a _game_ rather than say... shooting up your school? What is the connection between paintball and this incident, it's not at all clear from TFA.
No, not really. I don't watch many channels at all, and that is the point. There's nothing on that catches my interest most of the time, so I default to stations with *some* intelligence, like PBS, or if I'm really bored, C-SPAN. You see, I get all my entertainment over the internets. I have more video waiting for me every day than I can watch, stuff that I DO like. Most of it is not on TV either, since there are no nerd channels (G4 != nerd channel) that would have the kind of stuff I'm interested in. So in short, no, that argument falls on its face, at least for me. But I do see what you mean, if I did actually watch ANY of these channels SOME of the time there could be a bit of value left over from the trickle-down.
I pay for channels I don't ever watch, yet advertisers somehow profit from my having never viewed their adverts... It doesn't make sense unless the majority of people find *some* value in the channels (and thus watch their programming including the adverts). The value isn't with the advertisers until cable companies take the marketplace for granted by force-feeding us these channels. Since it's standard industry practice, who am I to rail against it, in other words?
The money the cable operators pay for the rights to channels like MTV, CNN and ESPN eats up just under $4 of every $10 they take in selling video service.
I could easily do without any of these channels. If they make up the bulk of the cost, it's a sham because there is so little value in anything these channels offer. It's not that the problem with cable is television (as a medium), it's that there's too much crappy programming and it costs too much to license.
Slashdot Mirror
I was serious that is not a troll, nice one mods.
Also a push into a potentially massive market -- almost-disposable commodity components running Linux. If they can pull it off without summoning teh wrath of steveb they will look like an innovator and at least strengthen their brand. But they might cut themselves out of the margin, I can't imagine these would sell for much (not likely to be the next iPod in terms of revenue).
Mmmmyes DELL ARM netbooks! Your trashcan is eager to collect them all!
Techdirt is regurgitating from an interest group ... blog. *palmface*
...the wtfbbq tag would have been more appropriate :/
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH.
Sensationalism on Techdirt.
Fixed that for you.
Nothing new to see here, move along.
Haven't met any good programmers then?
Here is a deep link to the part of the video where Hodgman actually starts talking about Obama being a nerd: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yW7OPByRGDY#t=7m56s
It's for making the **whoosh** sound for which your reply calls.
Dear sirs, I hear the underpants gnomes have some distribution rights for sale... I'd be happy to negotiate a deal on their behalf with Take-Two.
cracker?
Maybe, are you offering me one? Seriously tho, catch the net. The new terms are 'white hat' and 'black hat' or the ever-mysterious 'gray hat'. Hackers vs crackers is sooo 10 years ago.
The email came an hour later, LOL. My patience is too thin apparently?
Registered on Linux.com, never got an email confirmation, yet I can retrieve my username with the 'forgot username' form (confirmation that I didn't have a typo), but my account is locked out because it was never activated. Rock on, linux.com.
we haven't started having regular sales
So you must have some nice IP that you've developed... or maybe even a prototype of some kind of widget. Shop around, if someone is already interested, there should be more offers waiting for you. Your best option is probably to wait for those competing offers, or to seek them out when your company is ready.
I got a 503 and when /. came back the # of comments per article was gone on the front page. Maybe it was something to do with caching problems?
I suppose. So their logic goes something like this then: "We will crush their primal urges by banning paintball!" Brilliant.
What is this threshold anyway? Isn't it healthier to act out your aggression by playing a _game_ rather than say... shooting up your school? What is the connection between paintball and this incident, it's not at all clear from TFA.
Argh, it's too early in the morning. Here's a deep youtube link to the footage of the arrests.
GamePolitics was on hand to cover the protest, and took video of the arrests...
All I saw was a line of cops in front of the Army XP Center and some protesters mingling about.
I suppose he also missed the cult of Hollerith cards, the cult of EBCDIC, the cult of the S/360 Green Card, and the cult of THINK.
InfoWorld readers.
No, not really. I don't watch many channels at all, and that is the point. There's nothing on that catches my interest most of the time, so I default to stations with *some* intelligence, like PBS, or if I'm really bored, C-SPAN. You see, I get all my entertainment over the internets. I have more video waiting for me every day than I can watch, stuff that I DO like. Most of it is not on TV either, since there are no nerd channels (G4 != nerd channel) that would have the kind of stuff I'm interested in. So in short, no, that argument falls on its face, at least for me. But I do see what you mean, if I did actually watch ANY of these channels SOME of the time there could be a bit of value left over from the trickle-down.
I pay for channels I don't ever watch, yet advertisers somehow profit from my having never viewed their adverts... It doesn't make sense unless the majority of people find *some* value in the channels (and thus watch their programming including the adverts). The value isn't with the advertisers until cable companies take the marketplace for granted by force-feeding us these channels. Since it's standard industry practice, who am I to rail against it, in other words?
The money the cable operators pay for the rights to channels like MTV, CNN and ESPN eats up just under $4 of every $10 they take in selling video service.
I could easily do without any of these channels. If they make up the bulk of the cost, it's a sham because there is so little value in anything these channels offer. It's not that the problem with cable is television (as a medium), it's that there's too much crappy programming and it costs too much to license.