Offshoring will save costs,m and ensure that overseas developers, often with considerably greater knowledge of these systems will be able to develop them. the risks are totalyl negligible. I say we petition the government to offshore more development.
HBO have funded some highly regarded programmes, albeit somewhat not to everyone's taste. I'm sure that the science fiction fans would be a group who was willing to pay a subscription for their TV shows.
Harm through negligence. Youtubes very existence has resulted in a lot of traffic to utube.com, virtually none of it likely to be interested in tubing. The result has been to cost them a lot in badwidth. It's up to the court to decide whether simpyl by choosing an easily confused name, youtube were negligent.
It might be seen as domain squatting if they decided to do that though. Perhaps google might offer a per-click fee for a link to youtube as a settlement, depending on how non-evil they're feeling...
Ireland switched over a couple of years ago. Their society hasn't collapsed just yet. The US is a bigger place, so might not be quite so easy to do so quickly but it would be possible. The real problem is ingrained habits. Britain has been nominally metric for quite some time, but people still want to know about milk and beer in pints, butter in pounds, and fuel efficency in mpg.
I'm not sure if this would still be effective. Do all fax machines still use paper? I'd have thought that any system that's getting a lot and doesn't need a hardcopy will be using a computer based system
Spam only requires something like one response to be successful. Do the pump and dump schemes even get that? They'd need to trick someone who is savvy enough to understand something about the stock market, who surely must be all be aware that some people will try unscrupulous means to try to fleece them.
Can they even measure the effectiveness of their marketting?
Google does well, because... they have a single popular product. The search engine. It makes enough money to fund a lot of failures. Everything else is just them playing around hoping to strike lucky again. At the rate they're going, they'll probably end up with another succesful product through sheer dumb luck. This is probably the idea.
But why do people find this so strange? Microsoft have a similar way of working. A lot of their products lose money. They make all their money from Windows and Office. Like Google search, this is a cash cow. There's little room for growth, so all the money is invested in getting a foothold in other areas.
Hrm... Witchcraft isn't a religion either, and only a small part of wicca is involved with witchcraft. If a group of people set up a religion that incorporated the ancient knowledge of the healing properties of herbs, then that wouldn't be an ancient religion either. Christianity has a lot more to do with judaism than Wicca has to any ancient religion, yet few would argue that Christianity was substantially older then 2000 years.
The actual name of the holiday is what people choose to call the holiday. It happens that it falls on the same day as the celtic holiday of Samhain. Because of the proximity, and some PR by the church, some of the traditions were absorbed into Alls Hallow's eve.
Now, where and when does the celebration encourage fear and hate? It's a time of partying and festivals and candy, where children go around knocking on doors and delighting old people in their costumes in exchange for sweets.
Okay - on one hand we have a bit of commercial news that Google are starting to share revenue. Interesting, I'm sure, but not groundbreaking. I expect a few more changes in the online video market in the next 3-5 years.
On the other hand, we have a couple of geeks who set up a cascade of diet-coke fountains and made a video from it! This is Slashdot! It's meant to be "news for nerds, stuff that matters"! What could be more important than violent chemical reactions?
In the free people's republic of China, we are constantly hurt and shocked by your nation's habit of censoring what you hear, and the spreading of propaganda that you are free and we are not. Anyone who was allowed to travel would know that the opposite is true, but your government restricts travel. Either by inflating prices to make it too expensive to travel, or by malicious rumors and propaganda such as suggesting that all other nations hate Americans, and by printing stories in government controlled websites such as Slshdot that we have censorship.
Google do not promote freedom. They sold out to your government as soon as they became popular, and only allowed the company to operate in China if they agreed to censor certain websites.
What was so bad about TNG? Well, okay, apart from the moralising.
I think it was one of the finest sci-fi series of the 80's. It covered various real world issues, the production values were top notch, it had some excellent actors, and the stories could be about just about anything.
This is probably not in breach of trademark. Just like after Jurassic Park, there were countless cash-in products, with the word "Purassic" in their name, and nobody could touch them because Jurassic is an ordinary word used to describe dinosaurs. It can clearly be argued that "Serenity" shirts are about expressing the sentiment. Just because it's a cash-in doesn't always mean it's a trademark violation. Key points are that this is in a different market from the movie, the font used is nothing like that used on official merchandies, and the trademakred term is a commonly used word in the English language.
Legal action isn't the only method at our disposal. Firefly fans are organised, and highly fanatical. This is pretty much the point. It's actually possible that they would be able to encourage a lrge part of the fanbase to avoid all universal products. More tactically, they could pick on a single specific proerty, and decide to encourage a direct competitor. If Universal's #1 big budget film is pushed into the #2 spot, they might just notice.
True. But in both cases there would be be enough evidence to conclude that the reason for faking bill of sale, or for printing a boarding pass was because you had fraudulent intent. Ideally there would and should be a presumption of innocence, but I'd imagine that if you simply remained silent, the jury would have no qualms about finding you guilty of conspiracy to commit fraud.
Aviation expert John Nance says... "There's a free speech issue of course, but this is under the same legal categorization as screaming fire in a crowded theater."
Can people please stop using this as an excuse for any and all demands to curb freedom of speech. The only time this argument applies is if the specific speech in a place will cause panic. It's appropriate to bomb scares, and possibly false accusations, but if you think that making fraudulant boarding passes shoudl be curtailed, find a maore appropriate reason.
Assuming the disks were very smooth and the internal atmosphere of the drive is gas-only (no dust - a safe assumption)
From the article: "the nature of our flying heads is such that dust is sucked away from the head-disk interface, meaning the drives do not have to be assembled in a clean room.". So presumably any dust that does drift onto the platter simply doesn't cause enough of a turbulance problem.
Why's everyone so hard on this comment? It was just an analogy to indicate that the internet transmits data continuously across a resource with limitted capacity, as opposed to just transporting a whole chunk of data in one go.
It's a nice idea, but wireless is slow. Certainly slower than firewire anyway. And these havea lot of storage. Will people really want to spend several hours uploading their mp3 collection?
Slashdot Mirror
Offshoring will save costs,m and ensure that overseas developers, often with considerably greater knowledge of these systems will be able to develop them. the risks are totalyl negligible. I say we petition the government to offshore more development.
Yours - Cylon number 6
HBO have funded some highly regarded programmes, albeit somewhat not to everyone's taste. I'm sure that the science fiction fans would be a group who was willing to pay a subscription for their TV shows.
Which is a bit of a problem - although the creature comfort ads were very popular and won awards, they were a failure for a simple reason.
Everyone thought the electricity ads were for British Gas!
so what is the basis for restitution?
Harm through negligence. Youtubes very existence has resulted in a lot of traffic to utube.com, virtually none of it likely to be interested in tubing. The result has been to cost them a lot in badwidth. It's up to the court to decide whether simpyl by choosing an easily confused name, youtube were negligent.
It might be seen as domain squatting if they decided to do that though. Perhaps google might offer a per-click fee for a link to youtube as a settlement, depending on how non-evil they're feeling...
Ireland switched over a couple of years ago. Their society hasn't collapsed just yet. The US is a bigger place, so might not be quite so easy to do so quickly but it would be possible. The real problem is ingrained habits. Britain has been nominally metric for quite some time, but people still want to know about milk and beer in pints, butter in pounds, and fuel efficency in mpg.
I'm not sure if this would still be effective. Do all fax machines still use paper? I'd have thought that any system that's getting a lot and doesn't need a hardcopy will be using a computer based system
Spam only requires something like one response to be successful. Do the pump and dump schemes even get that? They'd need to trick someone who is savvy enough to understand something about the stock market, who surely must be all be aware that some people will try unscrupulous means to try to fleece them.
Can they even measure the effectiveness of their marketting?
Google does well, because... they have a single popular product. The search engine. It makes enough money to fund a lot of failures. Everything else is just them playing around hoping to strike lucky again. At the rate they're going, they'll probably end up with another succesful product through sheer dumb luck. This is probably the idea.
But why do people find this so strange? Microsoft have a similar way of working. A lot of their products lose money. They make all their money from Windows and Office. Like Google search, this is a cash cow. There's little room for growth, so all the money is invested in getting a foothold in other areas.
Hrm... Witchcraft isn't a religion either, and only a small part of wicca is involved with witchcraft. If a group of people set up a religion that incorporated the ancient knowledge of the healing properties of herbs, then that wouldn't be an ancient religion either. Christianity has a lot more to do with judaism than Wicca has to any ancient religion, yet few would argue that Christianity was substantially older then 2000 years.
The actual name of the holiday is what people choose to call the holiday. It happens that it falls on the same day as the celtic holiday of Samhain. Because of the proximity, and some PR by the church, some of the traditions were absorbed into Alls Hallow's eve.
Now, where and when does the celebration encourage fear and hate? It's a time of partying and festivals and candy, where children go around knocking on doors and delighting old people in their costumes in exchange for sweets.
Or to put it another way, get over yourself.
Yes. As the article says? What's your point, and why is it more interesting than mixing Diet Coke and Mentos?
Okay - on one hand we have a bit of commercial news that Google are starting to share revenue. Interesting, I'm sure, but not groundbreaking. I expect a few more changes in the online video market in the next 3-5 years.
On the other hand, we have a couple of geeks who set up a cascade of diet-coke fountains and made a video from it! This is Slashdot! It's meant to be "news for nerds, stuff that matters"! What could be more important than violent chemical reactions?
I wonder if I can pay taxes in World of Warcraft gold.
In the free people's republic of China, we are constantly hurt and shocked by your nation's habit of censoring what you hear, and the spreading of propaganda that you are free and we are not. Anyone who was allowed to travel would know that the opposite is true, but your government restricts travel. Either by inflating prices to make it too expensive to travel, or by malicious rumors and propaganda such as suggesting that all other nations hate Americans, and by printing stories in government controlled websites such as Slshdot that we have censorship.
Google do not promote freedom. They sold out to your government as soon as they became popular, and only allowed the company to operate in China if they agreed to censor certain websites.
What was so bad about TNG? Well, okay, apart from the moralising.
I think it was one of the finest sci-fi series of the 80's. It covered various real world issues, the production values were top notch, it had some excellent actors, and the stories could be about just about anything.
This is probably not in breach of trademark. Just like after Jurassic Park, there were countless cash-in products, with the word "Purassic" in their name, and nobody could touch them because Jurassic is an ordinary word used to describe dinosaurs. It can clearly be argued that "Serenity" shirts are about expressing the sentiment. Just because it's a cash-in doesn't always mean it's a trademark violation. Key points are that this is in a different market from the movie, the font used is nothing like that used on official merchandies, and the trademakred term is a commonly used word in the English language.
Legal action isn't the only method at our disposal. Firefly fans are organised, and highly fanatical. This is pretty much the point. It's actually possible that they would be able to encourage a lrge part of the fanbase to avoid all universal products. More tactically, they could pick on a single specific proerty, and decide to encourage a direct competitor. If Universal's #1 big budget film is pushed into the #2 spot, they might just notice.
True. But in both cases there would be be enough evidence to conclude that the reason for faking bill of sale, or for printing a boarding pass was because you had fraudulent intent. Ideally there would and should be a presumption of innocence, but I'd imagine that if you simply remained silent, the jury would have no qualms about finding you guilty of conspiracy to commit fraud.
Aviation expert John Nance says ... "There's a free speech issue of course, but this is under the same legal categorization as screaming fire in a crowded theater."
Can people please stop using this as an excuse for any and all demands to curb freedom of speech. The only time this argument applies is if the specific speech in a place will cause panic. It's appropriate to bomb scares, and possibly false accusations, but if you think that making fraudulant boarding passes shoudl be curtailed, find a maore appropriate reason.
Assuming the disks were very smooth and the internal atmosphere of the drive is gas-only (no dust - a safe assumption)
From the article: "the nature of our flying heads is such that dust is sucked away from the head-disk interface, meaning the drives do not have to be assembled in a clean room.". So presumably any dust that does drift onto the platter simply doesn't cause enough of a turbulance problem.
Why's everyone so hard on this comment? It was just an analogy to indicate that the internet transmits data continuously across a resource with limitted capacity, as opposed to just transporting a whole chunk of data in one go.
It's a nice idea, but wireless is slow. Certainly slower than firewire anyway. And these havea lot of storage. Will people really want to spend several hours uploading their mp3 collection?
Yeah. because dictionaries are typically descriptive rather than prescriptive.
As it happens, words enter the language because people use them that way. It's how languages work.
So it looks like UBM want to try this case in court rather than the media.
Unusual, but I imagine there's some sort of precedent.
So, what would you suggest th law should be, assuming that society considers anauthorised sharing of other people's content to be harmful.