Well that's good. What people without electricity, food, drinking water, and a roof over their heads really need is internet access!
So, exactly how does someone without power get a computer working? Are they really that hard up for porn?
Hey T-mo! Stop pushing your products and instead give something that could really help. Like phone service so people can call loved ones, or cold hard cash to help bring relief.
Well, it sounds good on the surface, but starts getting a little muddier when you get into it.
How much does your average cell phone provider charge for a month of service? Let's be generous and say $30, plus $10 for the "in network" plan. So, $40 right there.
Next, you add the regularly poor quality of a cell phone call, with its drop outs in sound, etc. to the equally (if not moreso) poor quality of a VoIP call, and you end up with a lot of "huh? what? can you hear me now?" in your conversations.
People who tend to spend so much time on their cell phone that they go over the costs associated with having the second phone line value value their ability to communicate and won't tolerate the kind of frustrations with this "cheap" solution.
Even though I'm not the biggest Microsoft fan, I find something slightly disturbing about my government sending my tax dollars out of country with a software contract award. Why not Open Office?
Ok, so maybe it supports AAC, but the songs that come from the iTunes Music Store have DRM protection in them, and Windows Media Player definitely won't support that format. So sure, you can copy your own songs encoded by iTunes into AAC, but why use AAC if it isn't DRM'd?
Being a copycat has always been a strategic business move. Let some other company develop a product, spend countless revisions figuring out what doesn't work, have lots of expensive bombs and R&D costs. Then you simply make a cheaper version of the sucessful product without comitting your own resources to forging the path.
That, my friend, is known as smart business.
Need an example? Here's a quick one. Tivo and the satellite/cable PVRs. The content providers can do it cheaper, because they don't have those large R&D bills. Tivo, on the other hand, has to produce the product, pay the expenses incurred, and still somehow make a profit.
The innovator is usually the one who ends up going out of business. Apple is (currently) the exception.
Hey, what about the hero of that other Sci-Fi epic, Battlefield Earth? You know, "Johnny Goodboy"? Maybe they use the same writers. The storyline quality is about the same.
Now that I've admitted to watching BE, I'm going to go hide.
This isn't a case of someone sequencing a gene and then patenting it. Monsanto created a scientifically modified version of a soy bean genome and made a novel invention: a plant designed to be resistant to its proprietary pesticide. This isn't a naturally designed construct, but the product of research and development for specific gain.
Don't like it? Grow natural soy beans. Mother Nature's patent expired a long time ago.;)
I'd say it would have a very large affect on their bottom line. Comcast is a corporation, with obligations to its stockholders. Considering you don't need all that much bandwidth to download your standard webpage in a reasonable amount of time, and your average broadband commercial mentions "downloading music and movies in high speed!", it is reasonable to assume that a large portion of their subscriber base is using the service to download media files over P2P services.
Now, say Comcast is seen as ratting out their customers to the [MP|RI]AA, and suddenly those users decide downloading those files isn't worth the risk anymore, and by the by, they no longer need broadband. Big impact on Comcast.
That's not to say this isn't a good thing for them to do, but it isn't out of the kindness of their hearts. They did the math.
It clearly states that Verisign's contract to run.net is coming to an end in June 2005, and ICANN added the $0.75 fee as a requirement for the companies bidding to operate the TLD. When the others come up, look for the same trick.
It clearly states that Verisign's contract to run.net is coming to an end in June 2005, and ICANN added the $0.75 fee as a requirement for the companies bidding to operate the TLD.
Let me just say that this is the experience of one person, using a Japanese version of the product, and exactly one sample. The audio problems could be a sign of a defective unit, not a design flaw. Anyone who would make a buying decision based on one person whom they don't know should think again. The interface nitpicks could of course be cured with a simple software update.
In fact, further down that thread, someone says their own unit doesn't have the hiss. This is the only showstopper I really see here. Does anyone else have experience with this player?
So let me get this straight. Private industry protects itself from government takeover, and everyone is against this?
This is a capitalist nation. People do things to make money in a free market economy. When you are forced to compete against the government, you usually lose.
You can't have it both ways here. Communism (the "people" own everything) vs. capitalism (the private sector owns things).
I'm sure if you were a small mom and pop shop offering wireless services in PA, you'd be very relieved at this bill too. How exactly do you compete against the government?
Here's another thought to go along with this. When was the last time you heard of the government offering new, innovative services? I thought so. The private sector - and the competition in that sector - drive innovation up and costs down. What possible incentive would I have to put out a new product if I had no hopes making a decent profit from it?
On one hand, I see 9 years in jail for sending nuisance email as excessive punishment, but on the other, they were making money committing fraud.
Since, however, they were tried simply on sending spam and NOT fradulent sales, I find this very disturbing. If the law they were being tried on was sending junk mail, does the content of the mail actually matter under this law? Why would the judge allow that information to be even considered?
It's kind of like trying someone for stealing a car, and saying it's a worse crime because he had a crack rock in his pocket. Unless the law stipulated stronger punishment for having drugs in a stolen car, it should be left out of the case.
What the people who compare the US to these tiny little countries fail to see is the vast differences in terms of scale we're talking about to make a comparable system in the US.
There is absolutely no comparison to networking a country the size of one of our smaller states and a country as physically vast and populated as the US. The prices for materials ends up being much higher, and the logistics problems grow in order of magnitudes.
When China or Russia or India run gigabit to every home, then I'll start worrying.
Quick note. The term "convicted monopoly" is wrong. There is NOTHING WRONG with being a monopoly. Abusing that monopoly to suppress your competition, however, a crime.
Slashdot Mirror
If only it was imminent...it would be so much nicer.
Oh well. Maybe next week.
Well that's good. What people without electricity, food, drinking water, and a roof over their heads really need is internet access!
So, exactly how does someone without power get a computer working? Are they really that hard up for porn?
Hey T-mo! Stop pushing your products and instead give something that could really help. Like phone service so people can call loved ones, or cold hard cash to help bring relief.
I hate those bastards! I knew they were going to try and sneak this crap past us! They were plo...oh wait, did you say Apple?
Wow! Spectacular use of technology Steve! You're my hero!
Well, it sounds good on the surface, but starts getting a little muddier when you get into it.
How much does your average cell phone provider charge for a month of service? Let's be generous and say $30, plus $10 for the "in network" plan. So, $40 right there.
Next, you add the regularly poor quality of a cell phone call, with its drop outs in sound, etc. to the equally (if not moreso) poor quality of a VoIP call, and you end up with a lot of "huh? what? can you hear me now?" in your conversations.
People who tend to spend so much time on their cell phone that they go over the costs associated with having the second phone line value value their ability to communicate and won't tolerate the kind of frustrations with this "cheap" solution.
My first thought too. But it still has the drawback that kept still photo porn from exploding before digital came out:
It has to be taken to a place to be "developed" onto a DVD. People aren't going to do that.
Can I consider Microtel a reputable company when they blatantly steal the "Customize It" button from the Dell website?
A case of blaming the highway for the high speed chase. Nothing new here...move alone.
Let's try this one. Google uses Linux is biased against Microsoft-based IIS servers!
:)
Oh wait..I forgot, we love Google and hate Microsoft.
Amazing how two sides of the same coin can be overlooked, isn't it?
Do you really believe that Google - or any other site doing SEO - just looks at the browser tag to know what page to serve?
In most cases, they also know the IP blocks the spiders come from. I have no doubt Google knows where Google's bots come from.
Even though I'm not the biggest Microsoft fan, I find something slightly disturbing about my government sending my tax dollars out of country with a software contract award. Why not Open Office?
Ok, so maybe it supports AAC, but the songs that come from the iTunes Music Store have DRM protection in them, and Windows Media Player definitely won't support that format. So sure, you can copy your own songs encoded by iTunes into AAC, but why use AAC if it isn't DRM'd?
No, that is when you DON'T believe a journalist, or a stock analyst.
Being a copycat has always been a strategic business move. Let some other company develop a product, spend countless revisions figuring out what doesn't work, have lots of expensive bombs and R&D costs. Then you simply make a cheaper version of the sucessful product without comitting your own resources to forging the path.
That, my friend, is known as smart business.
Need an example? Here's a quick one. Tivo and the satellite/cable PVRs. The content providers can do it cheaper, because they don't have those large R&D bills. Tivo, on the other hand, has to produce the product, pay the expenses incurred, and still somehow make a profit.
The innovator is usually the one who ends up going out of business. Apple is (currently) the exception.
Hey, what about the hero of that other Sci-Fi epic, Battlefield Earth? You know, "Johnny Goodboy"? Maybe they use the same writers. The storyline quality is about the same.
Now that I've admitted to watching BE, I'm going to go hide.
This isn't a case of someone sequencing a gene and then patenting it. Monsanto created a scientifically modified version of a soy bean genome and made a novel invention: a plant designed to be resistant to its proprietary pesticide. This isn't a naturally designed construct, but the product of research and development for specific gain.
;)
Don't like it? Grow natural soy beans. Mother Nature's patent expired a long time ago.
I'd say it would have a very large affect on their bottom line. Comcast is a corporation, with obligations to its stockholders. Considering you don't need all that much bandwidth to download your standard webpage in a reasonable amount of time, and your average broadband commercial mentions "downloading music and movies in high speed!", it is reasonable to assume that a large portion of their subscriber base is using the service to download media files over P2P services.
Now, say Comcast is seen as ratting out their customers to the [MP|RI]AA, and suddenly those users decide downloading those files isn't worth the risk anymore, and by the by, they no longer need broadband. Big impact on Comcast.
That's not to say this isn't a good thing for them to do, but it isn't out of the kindness of their hearts. They did the math.
RTFA.
.net is coming to an end in June 2005, and ICANN added the $0.75 fee as a requirement for the companies bidding to operate the TLD. When the others come up, look for the same trick.
It clearly states that Verisign's contract to run
RTFA.
.net is coming to an end in June 2005, and ICANN added the $0.75 fee as a requirement for the companies bidding to operate the TLD.
It clearly states that Verisign's contract to run
Let me just say that this is the experience of one person, using a Japanese version of the product, and exactly one sample. The audio problems could be a sign of a defective unit, not a design flaw. Anyone who would make a buying decision based on one person whom they don't know should think again. The interface nitpicks could of course be cured with a simple software update.
In fact, further down that thread, someone says their own unit doesn't have the hiss. This is the only showstopper I really see here. Does anyone else have experience with this player?
Just for the record, I believe "The Last Crusade" wasn't a referece to it being the last movie, but the last search for the Holy Grail.
My 1/50 of $1.
So let me get this straight. Private industry protects itself from government takeover, and everyone is against this?
This is a capitalist nation. People do things to make money in a free market economy. When you are forced to compete against the government, you usually lose.
You can't have it both ways here. Communism (the "people" own everything) vs. capitalism (the private sector owns things).
I'm sure if you were a small mom and pop shop offering wireless services in PA, you'd be very relieved at this bill too. How exactly do you compete against the government?
Here's another thought to go along with this. When was the last time you heard of the government offering new, innovative services? I thought so. The private sector - and the competition in that sector - drive innovation up and costs down. What possible incentive would I have to put out a new product if I had no hopes making a decent profit from it?
On one hand, I see 9 years in jail for sending nuisance email as excessive punishment, but on the other, they were making money committing fraud.
Since, however, they were tried simply on sending spam and NOT fradulent sales, I find this very disturbing. If the law they were being tried on was sending junk mail, does the content of the mail actually matter under this law? Why would the judge allow that information to be even considered?
It's kind of like trying someone for stealing a car, and saying it's a worse crime because he had a crack rock in his pocket. Unless the law stipulated stronger punishment for having drugs in a stolen car, it should be left out of the case.
What the people who compare the US to these tiny little countries fail to see is the vast differences in terms of scale we're talking about to make a comparable system in the US.
There is absolutely no comparison to networking a country the size of one of our smaller states and a country as physically vast and populated as the US. The prices for materials ends up being much higher, and the logistics problems grow in order of magnitudes.
When China or Russia or India run gigabit to every home, then I'll start worrying.
Quick note. The term "convicted monopoly" is wrong. There is NOTHING WRONG with being a monopoly. Abusing that monopoly to suppress your competition, however, a crime.
Thank you, drive through.
EFF Action Center
They produce a very thorough draft letter for just about every one of these evil bills.