I don't think Google has any intention of aquiring Skype. Skype isn't SIP compliant, and while Skype might be more well known right now, SIP is a standard, and Google's own developer page highlights a desire to integrate with one of Skype's competitors, the Gizmo Project:
http://www.google.com/talk/developer.html
I'm not 100% convinced. I'm about as anti-Republican as you can get, without falling off the edge of the world, so it's disturbing to me that I might end up agreeing with some of the worst of the worst on this.
Awwww... It's ok. Everyone's a little afraid of being a republican at first. I'm sure you'll warm up to it. *grin*
Ummm... hmmm.. Conservatives? Wow. Sounds like you have a beef against people like me. Guess what: I'm a conservative. And you know what you might find rather surprising? It was the conservative judges that were dissenting:
In a bitter dissent, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor said the majority had created an ominous precedent. "The specter of condemnation hangs over all property," she wrote. "Nothing is to prevent the state from replacing any Motel 6 with a Ritz-Carlton, any home with a shopping mall, or any farm with a factory."
"Any property may now be taken for the benefit of another private property, but the fallout from this decision will not be random," she wrote. "The beneficiaries are likely to be those citizens with disproportionate influence and power in the political process, including large corporations and development firms.
"As for the victims," Justice O'Connor went on, "the government now has license to transfer property from those with fewer resources to those with more. The Founders cannot have intended this perverse result."
It pisses me off when people jump to conclusions without hearing all the facts. Next time, please do your homework first.
-D
"...treated prisoners in a way that defies the Geneva Convention... "
Sorry to burst your liberal bubble... but the Geneva Convention does not apply here. If you're going to cite the Geneva Convention (presumably you're talking about the 3rd convention, that dealt with the treatment of prisoners -- but you weren't specific, probably out of ignorance), at least get it right:
"There exists exemptions to the Third Convention for "High Contracting Parties" to this convention. In the case of a conflict between a signatory and a non-signatory the signatory shall remain bound until such time as the non-signatory no longer acts under the strictures of the convention." I don't believe 'Al Qaeda' is a signatory party to the Geneva Convention.
How many 'other countries' are giving aid to countries abroad? How many other countries rush in to defend their allies to the death? How many other countries liberate people from dictators? How many other countries lead by innovating? How many other countries allow their people to own property?
And how is 'doing what everyone else is doing' the same as 'doing what's right'?
It's NOTE just the economy, you're right. But I think you're the one with the narrow mind.
... It seems as if mergers and acqusitions always have some negative effect on the customer.
Actually, I'd have to disagree with you. Ultimately, this particular merger is going to have a negative effect on the shareholders of whoever is buying MP3.com. After all, they're the one's losing money at the hands of somebody else's poor decision making. You (or any other consumer, for that matter) can form a corporation for about $100, throw up a web site for about another $100 a month, and with a little creativity and a lot of hard work could pretty easily compete with MP3.com. After all, it sounds like they're opening up this niche again -- so lots of people with have an opportunity to fill it.
Unfortunately, this is a major one. Shouldn't the government be able to step in?
ARE YOU INSANE? Have you SEEN how the department of transportation is run the last time you got a driver's license? Have you seen the tax laws lately? You want THOSE GUYS to manage our music?
Ha! I had to wakeup at 2:00am every morning, make our own cable from a pile of rusty nails with our BARE HANDS. We didn't have PHONES so we had to SCREAM the audio training signal at the line and HOPE that the lucky bastard on the other end of the line heard it and understood it. If I was lucky, I could kill a rat in the street in front of our house and eat it before my father beat us till we went to sleep.
Ummmm... apparently you've never heard of DefCon? Not to rain on anybody's parade -- but I was there last year (@ Defcon 0a) and we had more than 5000 peoples I think.
This year will be bigger. The Norwegians have NOTHING on us (DefCon is even in Vegas).
Dan
Less than 200 Dems voted for it. But I digress. This really isn't a Republican or Democrat issue -- if anything it's a Democrat issue (as Dems want larger, more expansive, more intrusive government).
I completely disagree. Bandwidth is analagous to people using roads (network connections). If roads are heavily used, they must be maintained, or they fall into disrepair. If network connections are heavily used, ISP's need capital to get bigger (or more) connections so that certain service levels can be maintained.
We don't live in an (entirely) communist world. We don't get to pass out resources indiscriminately. We have a fixed amount of resources, and as with any case of supply and demand, the person holding the supply can (and should) charge for using the resource. In the case of network bandwidth, the resource is not obvious, but it is still tangible: It is network equipment and opportunity costs.
Did it ever occur to you that while companies might not lower their prices when they outsource, they increase their profit margins? And did it ever occur to you that increasing profit margins = good thing?
Of course, we could always take your solution to heart. After all, what harm could come of boycotting a company because they outsource labor at a cheaper cost? Why not punish companies for attempting to post a profit? After all, it's not like employees need to be competitive in THEIR skills, right? And after all, Americans DESERVE to be highly paid even though they have fewer skills than folks overseas. Sure.... makes sense to me.
It's hard enough to launch a new publication. But doing it on the Web -- a new medium with no proven business models -- has been even more, uh, challenging, as they say in corporate seminars. Then you throw in a recession, the advertising market meltdown, 9/11, the Bush backlash against pretty much everything Salon stands for, looming war with Iraq
Give me a break. It couldn't possibly be that perhaps, er, I mean just MAYBE... not enough people actually wanted to use the site? I mean, it couldn't actually be the content, could it? Just a quick comparison the WSJ online (the other site linked to in the summary, above) has WELL over half a million online subscribers.
That's a bit of a difference. Check out the numbers yourself at http://advertising.wsj.com/online/audience/index.h tml
It seems to me that Salon.com wants to blame everyone but themselves.
I hate to break it to you, but there are rumors that Newton actually created calculus too. Luckily, calculus hasn't been stolen yet, but it's under close watch now.
Slashdot Mirror
Here is a non-slashdotted article that explains this a bit better.
s p
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2025069,00.a
-D
Here is the .mobi information page on GoDaddy's website: http://www.godaddy.com/gdshop/tlds/mobi.asp?isc=go omobi01a
I don't think Google has any intention of aquiring Skype. Skype isn't SIP compliant, and while Skype might be more well known right now, SIP is a standard, and Google's own developer page highlights a desire to integrate with one of Skype's competitors, the Gizmo Project: http://www.google.com/talk/developer.html
Awwww ... It's ok. Everyone's a little afraid of being a republican at first. I'm sure you'll warm up to it. *grin*
-D
From http://apnews.myway.com/article/20050623/D8ATDSD80 .html
O'Connor was joined by
Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist (conservative)
Antonin Scalia (conservative)
Clarence Thomas (conservative)
O'Connor's dissent was surprisingly terse and (*gasp*) conservative!
From http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/23/politics/23wire- scotus.html?incamp=article_popular_4
In a bitter dissent, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor said the majority had created an ominous precedent. "The specter of condemnation hangs over all property," she wrote. "Nothing is to prevent the state from replacing any Motel 6 with a Ritz-Carlton, any home with a shopping mall, or any farm with a factory."
"Any property may now be taken for the benefit of another private property, but the fallout from this decision will not be random," she wrote. "The beneficiaries are likely to be those citizens with disproportionate influence and power in the political process, including large corporations and development firms.
"As for the victims," Justice O'Connor went on, "the government now has license to transfer property from those with fewer resources to those with more. The Founders cannot have intended this perverse result."
It pisses me off when people jump to conclusions without hearing all the facts. Next time, please do your homework first. -D
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
What 'necessary' actions as the EU taken recently?
Sorry to burst your liberal bubble
"There exists exemptions to the Third Convention for "High Contracting Parties" to this convention. In the case of a conflict between a signatory and a non-signatory the signatory shall remain bound until such time as the non-signatory no longer acts under the strictures of the convention." I don't believe 'Al Qaeda' is a signatory party to the Geneva Convention.
Don't ... plant's use CO2 to live?
... even still? I mean, just because Al Gore said it's possible doesn't make it so. Sheesh.
And isn't there a lot of speculation about global warming
How many 'other countries' are giving aid to countries abroad? How many other countries rush in to defend their allies to the death? How many other countries liberate people from dictators? How many other countries lead by innovating? How many other countries allow their people to own property?
And how is 'doing what everyone else is doing' the same as 'doing what's right'?
It's NOTE just the economy, you're right. But I think you're the one with the narrow mind.
It seems as if mergers and acqusitions always have some negative effect on the customer.
Actually, I'd have to disagree with you. Ultimately, this particular merger is going to have a negative effect on the shareholders of whoever is buying MP3.com. After all, they're the one's losing money at the hands of somebody else's poor decision making. You (or any other consumer, for that matter) can form a corporation for about $100, throw up a web site for about another $100 a month, and with a little creativity and a lot of hard work could pretty easily compete with MP3.com. After all, it sounds like they're opening up this niche again -- so lots of people with have an opportunity to fill it.
Unfortunately, this is a major one. Shouldn't the government be able to step in?
ARE YOU INSANE? Have you SEEN how the department of transportation is run the last time you got a driver's license? Have you seen the tax laws lately? You want THOSE GUYS to manage our music?
Nuff said.
I'm sorry ... were you saying something ... ?
I wasn't paying attention...
This is an awesome, insightful reply. (How often does that happen on Slashdot?!) Mod the parent up! (Please)
Ha! I had to wakeup at 2:00am every morning, make our own cable from a pile of rusty nails with our BARE HANDS. We didn't have PHONES so we had to SCREAM the audio training signal at the line and HOPE that the lucky bastard on the other end of the line heard it and understood it. If I was lucky, I could kill a rat in the street in front of our house and eat it before my father beat us till we went to sleep.
I think you can download it from www.exchange4linux.org
Ummmm... apparently you've never heard of DefCon? Not to rain on anybody's parade -- but I was there last year (@ Defcon 0a) and we had more than 5000 peoples I think. This year will be bigger. The Norwegians have NOTHING on us (DefCon is even in Vegas). Dan
Less than 200 Dems voted for it. But I digress. This really isn't a Republican or Democrat issue -- if anything it's a Democrat issue (as Dems want larger, more expansive, more intrusive government).
Dan
We don't live in an (entirely) communist world. We don't get to pass out resources indiscriminately. We have a fixed amount of resources, and as with any case of supply and demand, the person holding the supply can (and should) charge for using the resource. In the case of network bandwidth, the resource is not obvious, but it is still tangible: It is network equipment and opportunity costs.
Dell has a 1U monitor/keyboard solution (that folds out) for $1400: http://www.dell.com/us/en/bsd/products/model_svrac _2_svrac_monitor.htm
Dan
219: 50 for each of the instances, 1 for the base server and 168 client access licenses.
Dan
As always, the answer is a union.
Did it ever occur to you that while companies might not lower their prices when they outsource, they increase their profit margins? And did it ever occur to you that increasing profit margins = good thing?
Of course, we could always take your solution to heart. After all, what harm could come of boycotting a company because they outsource labor at a cheaper cost? Why not punish companies for attempting to post a profit? After all, it's not like employees need to be competitive in THEIR skills, right? And after all, Americans DESERVE to be highly paid even though they have fewer skills than folks overseas. Sure.... makes sense to me.
I called him. He mumbled something about "Slashdot", "No sleep", "Bill Gates", and then hung up. Weird, eh? I wonder when he'll stop.
Dan
Take a look at another part of their site -- they're already thinking about this: http://developer.axis.com/products/devboard_bt/ind ex.html
Give me a break. It couldn't possibly be that perhaps, er, I mean just MAYBE ... not enough people actually wanted to use the site? I mean, it couldn't actually be the content, could it? Just a quick comparison the WSJ online (the other site linked to in the summary, above) has WELL over half a million online subscribers.
That's a bit of a difference. Check out the numbers yourself at http://advertising.wsj.com/online/audience/index.h tml
It seems to me that Salon.com wants to blame everyone but themselves.
Nah. Al Gore already took that name. Or was it the 'Information superhighway'?
I hate to break it to you, but there are rumors that Newton actually created calculus too. Luckily, calculus hasn't been stolen yet, but it's under close watch now.
More at eleven ...