This is a great way to encourage those who may not have broadband access to make use of the service, since they're paying for it anyway. Granted this is the position of the technically inclined. Those less technically inclined might take umbrage at paying taxes to facilitate a service that they may not choose to use.
Technically inclined has nothing to do with it. Any non-Democrat should take umbrage at having to pay for things they don't use.
Combine this with a wearable computer to project the naked bodies of porn stars over people we see every day. Now, instead of undressing the girl in marketing with my eyes I can undress her with my cyborg-eye.
Why don't you talk to her and try to undress her FOR REAL.
True, scrapping and re-creating Outlook is certainly not cost-effective for the Microsoft.
Unfortunately the current Outlook mess is not very cost effective for their customers, just hit by the worm-du-jour.
So I guess it just depends from whose perspective you define "cost-effectiveness".
This is a lame argument, for two reasons.
(1) Microsoft released a patch that ultimately fixes 99.9% virus and worm problems in Outlook, by not allow Outlook to have access to any attachments that are executable. It's been available for well over a year now. The same technology is built in to Office XP.
(2) Now that you know the above, you can guess what problem number two is with your argument -- it doesn't matter if Microsoft 'fixes' the problem, either by releasing a patch as they've done, or rewriting Outlook from the ground up. It's still going to take a long time for most people to stop using the versions with huge, gaping security holes.
OK, fine, but how come I can barely see the guy's right eye in the picture [nwsource.com]? There's not much point in a transparent screen if the surrounding equipment is not tranparent.
Hold two fingers in front of one of your eyes. You can "see through them" right? Same principle with this device, which btw, is a prototype.
Or, here's an argument that even the youngest slashdotters will understand. The WWW is bloatware. Finding things is impossible because there's so much stuff out there. Think how much hard drive space is wasted on all kinds of web pages that only.00000000001% of the world ever reads. Since the vast majority of people only go to Yahoo, Ebay, and MSN, wouldn't the WWW be better if it only had Yahoo, Ebay, and MSN? It would be much more "optimized."
One difference is I don't run the entire WWW on my computer.
Microsoft is the Enron of software, primed to implode soon.
That is pure bullshit. Unlike Enron, Microsoft turns a huge profit. Unlike Enron (or any other company that ever existed), Microsoft has something like $30-$40 billion in cold, hard cash stashed away.
Imagine for a moment that the Government took away $29 billion in cash from Microsoft's stockpile (which they won't even touch in reality).
Microsoft would still be making a ton of money AND have $1 billion in cash in the bank.
This doesn't even count the rest of their huge investments.
Yeah, they're gonna implode like Enron, REAL SOON NOW!
Most Jedi, like Qui-Gon, probably do the "keep your mind on the here and now" thing. That philosophy ultimately gets them killed. Yoda and Obi-Wan can SEE the end coming--and take measures for another day. They can even see their demise, more or less, as Obi-Wan predicted to Luke before sacrificing himself to keep Vader from hindering Luke's first Death Star escape.
Nice theory, but really Obi-Wan sacrificed himself to Vader because Sir Alec Guiness stoutly refused to appear in a sequel...
he is not attacking MPAA, he is attacking hypocricy.
Actually he is attacking the MPAA, since he is protesting it, and he is TRYING to attack hypocracy, but not succeeding.
Viewed as a whole, Slashdot is much more vocal in the arena of anti-MPAA, et al. than it is agnostic or pro-MPAA. However, when the community is seen as flaking on the issue, being so stern against MPAA and saying it is evil, but then cratering when their own personal desires claim the better part of them, then that is where the problem is.
But you can't view slashdot 'as a whole,' because it's a community of people with differing views, not one huge borg of a thing with a single viewpoint. For example, I hate Linux and love BeOS. I realize many people, perhaps a majority of readers on here, love Linux. I recognize there are differing viewpoints.
It never ceases to amaze me how quickly Slashdot visitors forget their animosity towards the MPAA.
And it never ceases to amaze me how a reader of slashdot can assume there is no plurality here, amongst at least half a million others. We don't all harbor a blinding hate of the MPAA.
I wish the MPAA would drop their stance on a lot of issues. They wish I would stop using DeCSS to view DVD's on alternate OS's. They wish I would stop using Morpheus to view certain things.
But that doesn't mean I won't go and entertain myself for $8.
I have not seen a movie (aside from free TV movies) in the past year and a half. And I won't. I have scruples.
You are free to protest it, just don't expect EVERYONE on slashdot to do the same. And because one part of slashdot is like you and complains loudly, don't expect another part of slashdot not to like and discuss upcoming movies.
While I suspect that Harry has read of things from the movie
Yeah, like the script, which he reviewed.
it is HIGHLY unlikely that he's seen the movie in its final form
Except that he's never been shown to be a liar before, so why risk it now?
Because, according to LFL, the movie still has a lot of post-production work (the CGI) to be done. In fact, the latest preview is missing a few key pieces...watch the last scene where 14 Jedi are on their last stand, surrounded by a lot of aliens and battle droids.
Perhaps that is why he said this in his review:
The movie was not complete. There were moments where the effects were quite rough, but the work that was finished, was beyond reproach.
Aside from that, if you actually applied Occam's Razor as you claim, the simplest explanation is that he DID see the movie. Not that there is this major conspiracy for him to write a fake review.
How in the hell are they getting video to the monitor over 802.11b. The article doesn't cover this aspect at all.
I can just imagine trying to decipher the text in my editor through all the block artifacts left from the MPEG compression they are doing to the video?!
The receiver finds an available IP address- although it seemed to ignore our DHCP server and actually took our routers IP once! This isn't a fatal flaw..., but you may wanna double check when you set this thing up to make sure you don't get any surprises.
Translation: The Rio DHCP client is broken.
The interface on the front of the box takes a little getting used to.
Translation: The Rio user interface sucks.
The screen on the receiver leaves a lot to be desired.
he advanced search page is all text, not even a banner ad so it's almost faster than google to load.
Huh? The advanced search page I see has not only their logo, but a banner ad, and some tables. So not only is it "almost faster" than google to load, it's nowhere close.
News like this always make me wonder when there's finally going to be a new revolution in "the land of the free" which would make it that once again.
Spare us!
1. Yes this tax increase sucks. For Canadians.
2. You are still free to not buy recordable media.
But I'm afraid that after 9/11 it'd be very hard to do something seemingly against your own country... Pity.
You really don't understand America. You are correct, you don't have the freedom to take it away from others. But you didn't have that right before 9/11 either.
Yet you are still free to march on the capital and protest against something you don't believe is right, with as many people as you can peacefully assemble.
The crux of it is things like the fact that they TRIED to have a monopoly by telling PC makers that they either had to sign a deal with Microsoft that they would never use any other OS in ANYTHING THEY MADE or not use any Microsoft products at all.
Wrong. It's not illegal to have a monopoly. It's illegal to abuse your monopoly power in order to retain your monopoly. That is their crime.
Unfortunately, most people think that the case is simply about Microsoft being too big because the media, even the technologically inclined side of the media, is grossly irrepresenting this story.
1. Irrepresenting is not a word. Try misrepresenting.
2. Most of the media I've seen on the case has been pretty fair about why they are on trial. I think most of the PEOPLE in this country don't bother paying attention, and probably think it's just because Microsoft is 'too big.'
However if it is in the best interests of the governed the government does have the right/duty to suspend the intellectual property rights of a company.
Says you. I personally don't trust any government to decide what is "in the best interests of the governed."
For example the intellectual property rights on certain AIDS medications have been suspended in Brazil.
Yes, Brazil, that great bastion of liberty...
I respect the rights of an author to control their work
Slashdot Mirror
Will a government-run agency be able ot adapt fast enough when they next big thing comes along?
No.
My girlfriend is from Cumberland, and she's a total non-geek. She won't believe it when I tell her that her hometown is mentioned on Slashdot.
And by your own admission, she won't care, either.
This is a great way to encourage those who may not have broadband access to make use of the service, since they're paying for it anyway. Granted this is the position of the technically inclined. Those less technically inclined might take umbrage at paying taxes to facilitate a service that they may not choose to use.
Technically inclined has nothing to do with it. Any non-Democrat should take umbrage at having to pay for things they don't use.
Reduce taxes and bring on user fees instead.
Combine this with a wearable computer to project the naked bodies of porn stars over people we see every day. Now, instead of undressing the girl in marketing with my eyes I can undress her with my cyborg-eye.
Why don't you talk to her and try to undress her FOR REAL.
True, scrapping and re-creating Outlook is certainly not cost-effective for the Microsoft.
Unfortunately the current Outlook mess is not very cost effective for their customers, just hit by the worm-du-jour.
So I guess it just depends from whose perspective you define "cost-effectiveness".
This is a lame argument, for two reasons.
(1) Microsoft released a patch that ultimately fixes 99.9% virus and worm problems in Outlook, by not allow Outlook to have access to any attachments that are executable. It's been available for well over a year now. The same technology is built in to Office XP.
(2) Now that you know the above, you can guess what problem number two is with your argument -- it doesn't matter if Microsoft 'fixes' the problem, either by releasing a patch as they've done, or rewriting Outlook from the ground up. It's still going to take a long time for most people to stop using the versions with huge, gaping security holes.
OK, fine, but how come I can barely see the guy's right eye in the picture [nwsource.com]? There's not much point in a transparent screen if the surrounding equipment is not tranparent.
Hold two fingers in front of one of your eyes. You can "see through them" right? Same principle with this device, which btw, is a prototype.
Or, here's an argument that even the youngest slashdotters will understand. The WWW is bloatware. Finding things is impossible because there's so much stuff out there. Think how much hard drive space is wasted on all kinds of web pages that only .00000000001% of the world ever reads. Since the vast majority of people only go to Yahoo, Ebay, and MSN, wouldn't the WWW be better if it only had Yahoo, Ebay, and MSN? It would be much more "optimized."
One difference is I don't run the entire WWW on my computer.
In short: He defends his position and makes some interesting remarks on Linux and the desktop.
WHAT IS HIS POSITION?
I realize links are provided that can be scrutinized to determine this, but there is a reason a space for 'story summary' is provided...
Microsoft is the Enron of software, primed to implode soon.
That is pure bullshit. Unlike Enron, Microsoft turns a huge profit. Unlike Enron (or any other company that ever existed), Microsoft has something like $30-$40 billion in cold, hard cash stashed away.
Imagine for a moment that the Government took away $29 billion in cash from Microsoft's stockpile (which they won't even touch in reality).
Microsoft would still be making a ton of money AND have $1 billion in cash in the bank.
This doesn't even count the rest of their huge investments.
Yeah, they're gonna implode like Enron, REAL SOON NOW!
Most Jedi, like Qui-Gon, probably do the "keep your mind on the here and now" thing. That philosophy ultimately gets them killed. Yoda and Obi-Wan can SEE the end coming--and take measures for another day. They can even see their demise, more or less, as Obi-Wan predicted to Luke before sacrificing himself to keep Vader from hindering Luke's first Death Star escape.
Nice theory, but really Obi-Wan sacrificed himself to Vader because Sir Alec Guiness stoutly refused to appear in a sequel...
I will stop punishing you now.
he is not attacking MPAA, he is attacking hypocricy.
Actually he is attacking the MPAA, since he is protesting it, and he is TRYING to attack hypocracy, but not succeeding.
Viewed as a whole, Slashdot is much more vocal in the arena of anti-MPAA, et al. than it is agnostic or pro-MPAA. However, when the community is seen as flaking on the issue, being so stern against MPAA and saying it is evil, but then cratering when their own personal desires claim the better part of them, then that is where the problem is.
But you can't view slashdot 'as a whole,' because it's a community of people with differing views, not one huge borg of a thing with a single viewpoint. For example, I hate Linux and love BeOS. I realize many people, perhaps a majority of readers on here, love Linux. I recognize there are differing viewpoints.
It never ceases to amaze me how quickly Slashdot visitors forget their animosity towards the MPAA.
And it never ceases to amaze me how a reader of slashdot can assume there is no plurality here, amongst at least half a million others. We don't all harbor a blinding hate of the MPAA.
I wish the MPAA would drop their stance on a lot of issues. They wish I would stop using DeCSS to view DVD's on alternate OS's. They wish I would stop using Morpheus to view certain things.
But that doesn't mean I won't go and entertain myself for $8.
I have not seen a movie (aside from free TV movies) in the past year and a half. And I won't. I have scruples.
You are free to protest it, just don't expect EVERYONE on slashdot to do the same. And because one part of slashdot is like you and complains loudly, don't expect another part of slashdot not to like and discuss upcoming movies.
Yeah, like the script, which he reviewed.
it is HIGHLY unlikely that he's seen the movie in its final form
Except that he's never been shown to be a liar before, so why risk it now?
Because, according to LFL, the movie still has a lot of post-production work (the CGI) to be done. In fact, the latest preview is missing a few key pieces...watch the last scene where 14 Jedi are on their last stand, surrounded by a lot of aliens and battle droids.
Perhaps that is why he said this in his review:
Aside from that, if you actually applied Occam's Razor as you claim, the simplest explanation is that he DID see the movie. Not that there is this major conspiracy for him to write a fake review.
You conveniently forget about the hundreds of reviews he's done of big studio movies where he complains about how awful they are.
Oftentimes basing this solely on the script (Scooby Doo, anyone?).
I bet your opinion of the justice system would change... REAL QUICK.
How in the hell are they getting video to the monitor over 802.11b. The article doesn't cover this aspect at all.
I can just imagine trying to decipher the text in my editor through all the block artifacts left from the MPEG compression they are doing to the video?!
...to coin a phrase ... it just smells like chicken.
The receiver finds an available IP address- although it seemed to ignore our DHCP server and actually took our routers IP once! This isn't a fatal flaw..., but you may wanna double check when you set this thing up to make sure you don't get any surprises.
Translation: The Rio DHCP client is broken.
The interface on the front of the box takes a little getting used to.
Translation: The Rio user interface sucks.
The screen on the receiver leaves a lot to be desired.
Translation: The screen on the Rio sucks.
The Win98 software is very bare bones
Translation: The Rio software sucks.
Thank you.
he advanced search page is all text, not even a banner ad so it's almost faster than google to load.
Huh? The advanced search page I see has not only their logo, but a banner ad, and some tables. So not only is it "almost faster" than google to load, it's nowhere close.
If it wasn't for the "I'm feeling lucky" button then some day's I'd have no luck at all.
Then technically you're breaking Google's TOS. You are supposed to be feeling lucky BEFORE you press the button.
Maybe the rest of the world has a short memory, but I don't.
Your memory may not be short, but it is bad. They said they were stopping new development for the month of February.
News like this always make me wonder when there's finally going to be a new revolution in "the land of the free" which would make it that once again.
Spare us!
1. Yes this tax increase sucks. For Canadians.
2. You are still free to not buy recordable media.
But I'm afraid that after 9/11 it'd be very hard to do something seemingly against your own country... Pity.
You really don't understand America. You are correct, you don't have the freedom to take it away from others. But you didn't have that right before 9/11 either.
Yet you are still free to march on the capital and protest against something you don't believe is right, with as many people as you can peacefully assemble.
The crux of it is things like the fact that they TRIED to have a monopoly by telling PC makers that they either had to sign a deal with Microsoft that they would never use any other OS in ANYTHING THEY MADE or not use any Microsoft products at all.
Wrong. It's not illegal to have a monopoly. It's illegal to abuse your monopoly power in order to retain your monopoly. That is their crime.
Unfortunately, most people think that the case is simply about Microsoft being too big because the media, even the technologically inclined side of the media, is grossly irrepresenting this story.
1. Irrepresenting is not a word. Try misrepresenting.
2. Most of the media I've seen on the case has been pretty fair about why they are on trial. I think most of the PEOPLE in this country don't bother paying attention, and probably think it's just because Microsoft is 'too big.'
yet when it is microsoft whose only crime (at least its only crime which is being prosecuted) is the fact that it is too big
Don't feed the trolls, please.
However if it is in the best interests of the governed the government does have the right/duty to suspend the intellectual property rights of a company.
Says you. I personally don't trust any government to decide what is "in the best interests of the governed."
For example the intellectual property rights on certain AIDS medications have been suspended in Brazil.
Yes, Brazil, that great bastion of liberty...
I respect the rights of an author to control their work
No, you clearly don't.