I figured one of these days one of these online storage servers would go down, after all, the highlights of their storage often include nothing but kiddie porn and warez.
The way I look at it, one should be very cautious about where they place important data. Do the captialism check.
Are you paying for storage? No? Then the data, while owned by you, is of no particular concern to the people storing it.
Yes? Then you've got legitimate firepower and can contact others for a class-action lawsuit.
I guess the main thing to consider here is that if the service is free, you're going to have a hard time winning a case on legality issues alone.
If you've paid money, that changes the story entirely, and you'll be able to get action immediately.
Once again, IANAL but this is what I have found to be the case. Just look at Iomega's class action lawsuit for the "click-of-death". They shipped faulty drives that would corrupt disks. Where I work we've lost probably a few thousand dollars to paying to retrieve the data off these disks.
So even if you pay for the storage devices you use, a smart company can get around having to worry about what you claim to be *your* data.
Actually, now that I think about it, this story has nothing to do about who owns the data, but whether or not the free hosting companies should be "responsible" for it.
Well, as far as the items being owned by the University, I think they got you there. I do think you have an argument against explusion. I'd simply tell them that you are sorry that the siutation was something they did not approve of and would like to continue going to the University (on 'double-secret probation' if necessary).
Legally they can expell for any reason whatsoever, but politically they might not want to. Especially if you can garner enough support. (I'm sending them an email in your defense now)
Expelling a student for developing something that several students used, and for learning and making achievements that no other student probably has is something that they may have to answer to if you can get the local student government to back you.
Sorry to give you such a bleak outlook, but this is sometimes what Universities do.
I mean, seriously, the guy *can* write decent stuff. Impressive sometimes.
Now I know why. This guy is the opposite of the Microsoft FUD-bunnies that/. readers have grown to loathe. He's trying to scare us, for God know's what reason, into believing MS is going to take over the world. I'm guessing his intent is political in nature, maybe just a way of saying, "Hah you idiots, you voted Bush in, now Microsoft is going to take over."
He couldn't be furhur from the truth.
"The market for Windows servers grew 32 percent this year, while sales of servers running Unix grew only 14 percent."
Yeah, that's great Jon. Unix *is* a dying OS. *Linux* on the other hand was stated in that statistic to be what percent? Oh wait, you didn't include it. Not to mention including the source for that statistic, which would help those of us that have statistics saying NT isn't doing all that well.
Also, what about machines that are bought from Compaq (leader in server sales) and then formatted with a new OS? A number of times they *come* with NT.
Do you have any more specifics? I'm interested in *where* the site was hosted, *what* you had on it (any university-owned fonts?), and if they had given you any prior warning that you would be in trouble.
I'm empathetic at times, but before I send the University of Utah a nasty email in your defense, I'd like to be certain of the exact situation.
This is good information to have. No longer will we need to rely on people who say "IANAL but..." but rather say "IANAL but this guy is and he says...".
I've noticed that your site seems to lack some design elements that might make it seem more attractive and less
like a "scam" as many have assumed. Do you have any plans for redoing the site design?
I've also noticed that you have an amazing number of advertisments and popups, that add to the "scam"
feel that hits the user as they first enter the site. Do you have any plans to change the way you do advertising
on the webiste?
And lastly, I've found a page that lists how people
can make their own rings. Do you think that this open way of letting people make their own rings may somehow affect
your sales?
Just as it takes a long time for them to have the actors and actresses dub their voices to do it in English, there would also be a large amount of time needed for different actresses and actors to do it in Japanese or *insert desired languange*.
Not only that, but we are looking at probably several hours or maybe even days to do the final renders to make these films whole. So the amount of time to get the rendering done while accounting for the voices would end up being a nightmare.
Can anyone explain why scientists would rather *not* have items quarantined? If we have the means capable, might as well do it.
I think some folks might fail to realize that harmful substances from Martian material might burn up in our atmosphere, whereas harmful material would *not* burn up if brought in from a mechanism of human design.
I honestly don't care one way or the other, but I'm trying to determine why we *shouldn't* quarantine material when we have every means necessary to do so.
K5 has a hard enough time as it is. I knew something was up when I couldn't access it right after submitting my first story.
I guess K5 *can* get Slasdotted.
Re:Capitalism is slavery.
on
Sunspots
·
· Score: 1
When you don't possess your mean of production, you are a slave ( especially if you abolish minimum wage).
One could argue as such, but indeed that is not the definition of slave. Capitalism gives people choices. Socialism does not.
Happy to see an American that can accept the fact that democracy and socialism can go hand in hand.
They always do till a point, and inevitably socialism always overtakes democracy when one person will appoint themselves head of a nation. It is very easy for this to happen since in a socialist country you cannot have property rights. Actually *read* Marx's writings sometimes, I think you'd be suprised at how evil the man really was. He wanted all property collectively owned. He wanted newborn children taken from their parents to prevent them from being influenced by them.
Funny, you sound like a typical American to me...
So go ahead, you abolish the income tax, the minimum wage, medicare, welfare, you get more money in your pocket, and then what?
Then actual working people will live a happy, productive life, while those that are incompetent and lazy will suffer horribly. Welfare would turn back to what it used to be before FDR, with communities and other charitable organizations taking care of the poor and helping them get back on their feet, rather than the government cutting out paychecks so people can get by.
Capitalist Utopia is no better than Communist Utopia.
And here is where you fail to have structured any point. Not only that, but you seem to have shown a favor toward communism over socialism. Oh boy..
Communism entails building buildings and breaking them down so you can build them again since everyone is entitled to a job. No one has any chance of moving up in the world, and no choice is given on what you can eat. You are appropriated what you need to survive.
That's a real fun world. I think I'm done arguing as you haven't the competence to keep up with me.
Indeed we are. David Held (who some socialists refer to as a God) has commented that since FDR the US *has* indeed been a socialist country. His evidence comes from the capitalist system built upon socialist government roots especially in the areas of Research and Development. Large numbers of US universities are funded using taxpayer money. These universities then partially sell their services in R&D to capital enterprises.
We have something in the United States called Corporate Welfare, where businesses can apply to get money from the government. This is *NOT* capitalism, as the general rule of capitalism is to let failed businesses die. Big businesses are also reaching into Corporate Welfare money.
We have a minimum wage, which is something a capitalist country should not have. Businesses in the United States pay little or no taxes while employees pay around 40% to income tax, people don't think they are paying that much because they are told the business pays half, and they pay half. But employers would be able to afford 40% more in each of their respective salaries if income tax was abolished.
You are extremely wrong about welfare and social security. I can't even begin to address your lack of competence in this area. The citizens of this country *do* believe in them, that is why they haven't scraped either program yet. Only a hanful more believe it isn't working properly, but definately *not* the majority.
My social values are *not* a strong army and *not* a tax cut for the rich. In these two areas you have my position gravely mistaken. I would like to see an army of volunteers only, with perhaps a handful of paid positions. And rather than a tax cut for the rich, I would like to see an income tax elimination across the board, where *no one* pays taxes. After all, that'd be the only fair way, right?
Or maybe I'm wrong, you seem to have fallen into the trap of "tax cut for the rich". I'd like you to go ahead and reason this out for me. Granted, you *can* reason that the Bush (who I don't like) plan is a tax cut for the rich, but it definately does not benefit them percentage-wise more than any other American. It is only because they pay more of their income to taxes that they appear to be recieving the best deal.
And I feel really sorry for you if you bought into Gore's statements regarding the Bush tax plan.
You are right, a multi-billion dollar space shield is a complete waste of money. Here again is the will of the majority at work, something that in your socialist enviroment is perfectely acceptable.
Did you know that there is enough money being put into welfare that the United States government could cut everyone on it a 40,000 dollar check each year? You know why this will never happen? Because welfare now employees several million people across the country, whose incomes you are now paying for.
"I don't like the idea of filthy rich people existing next to people that don't even own there own life."
Capitalism in and of itself requires that people compete in a market with equal ability to make decisions. Someone who is enslaved to another person is limited in their ability to make decisions in the market, therefore slavery is *not* acceptable.
In a truly capitalist enviroment each individual is reponsible for their own success, so if anyone is wealthy, it is because they got there, not because they inherited it through a tax-free system while everyone else had to pay them.
Americans are always portrayed as bloodthirsty, gutless, soulless people. I personally don't care how I'm viewed, I definately have a different outlook on life than everyone else. Especially different than those in the majority of this country.
If capitalism works, why are there so many stupid rich people?
Because wealth and stupidity are totally independent of each other in a capitalistic system. In all fairness you fail to mention two very important things in your.sig troll:
1) "So many" is not very clear. Are you implying millions, thousands, or hundreds?
2) The current economic system in (what I'm assuming you're talking about) the United States only retains small hints of what used to be a capitalist structure.
I don't mind ardent socialists on/. or k5, I do mind their mistaken and oft misleading.sig's.
1) One word : Ebay
2) So what is it then?
1) You are implying that it is "stupid" to pay large amounts of money for something that the majority of people find a waste of money. If this is the case, why does the government (an extension of the will of the majority) continue to invest in programs that are failures, most notably welfare and social security?
For example: I don't see much use in an Ultima Online account that I spent time developing. I sell my character and it goes for thousands of dollars. *You*, and perhaps a majority of individuals, will look at the sale as something that signifies stupidity on the part of the wealthy party that bought the account.
*I* see the purchase made as a great benefit to myself as I can use the cash. The purchaser sees the purchase as worthwhile since the money means nothing to them, they value the time spent in the character moreso than the few thousand they are paying to obtain it.
The majority of the people in this country feel that it is the responsibility of the "collective soul" to take care of those less fortunate. Thus they work to implement programs that will do so.
I view this as a failure from the start, as individuals are better able to manage their own finances than any collective body of people who will inevitably feed off the money they are given themselves.
Because my view is held in the minority my views default to "evil" and the views of the majority are set at "good". It is the assurance that "everything will be fine" that is enough to please the majority, but I demand more reasoning and logic.
You may feel fine living in a world where "majority rules" but the truth is, there is always an issue where you will be in the minority.
2) In line with the majority/minority spiel I just gave, I think it will suffice to say that we live in a twisted socialistic economy, but are taught in school that it is a capitalistic enviroment. I have a feeling you were poorly educated on what capitalism really is and are only lashing out against it because it is the cool thing to do.
Please wise up and offer complete arguments regarding your views on capitalism, I'd be interested in hearing what you have to say.
If capitalism works, why are there so many stupid rich people?
Because wealth and stupidity are totally independent of each other in a capitalistic system. In all fairness you fail to mention two very important things in your.sig troll:
1) "So many" is not very clear. Are you implying millions, thousands, or hundreds?
2) The current economic system in (what I'm assuming you're talking about) the United States only retains small hints of what used to be a capitalist structure.
I don't mind ardent socialists on/. or k5, I do mind their mistaken and oft misleading.sig's.
Same basic story. Good card, ahead of its time, overpriced, nothing will take advantage of its best features. I bet in 12 months we think differently.
In 12 months the price will be what, half it is now? Still too high for this potential customer.
If current games are any indication of what to expect I doubt I'll be buying any for some time:
Counter-Strike (a Half-Life modification) is filling up with egotistical people who think a year is a long time to have been playing the game.
Quake3 was a *big* disappointment. Especially with CTF, where there is no grapple and there are bottomless pits that do instant kills, stuff you didn't see in Quake2 CTF, probably the biggest mod for the Quake trilogy. Rocket arena is impressive, but doesn't have quite the same loyal following.
Baldur's Gate series and the various MMORPGS just use graphics as eye-candy to lure 30-something year old men and women who are into fantasizing and playing roles, the meat of the games often misses the point of stratetic play, and they are a big downer for those of us hoping for more.
Sacrifice is, IMHO, the best game to have come out to take advantage of what some of the new graphics cards can do. Unfortunately for the rest of us, developers like Shiny are dropping the PC platform and now going back to console programming.
I hate to say it, but it looks like the future of gaming is going to rest back in the hands of consoles. I guess they finally figured out broadband was the device to attract users who used to use consoles before computers.
Only problem is that I don't want to go back to consoles. Guess I'm just screwed. Hell awaits me.
Why is everyone rambling about non-competes? This is an article regarding trade secrets and reasons why you can work at a competitor.
What I like about trade secret arguments for you not leaving one job to work at another is that they put the responsibility of proof on the previous employer. Where non-competes can only be disolved if you take the initiative.
Trade secret stuff is a no brainer for those that have jobs in IT. You can't take PHP code from one business and goto a competitor to work on it. Even if you are fired and are really pissed at your boss.
Anway, saying "looks like you can get screwed even if you don't sign a non-compete" is a very inappropriate thing to put in a news blurb on here. Especially since this has been around for a while and was intended to stop unethical business pratices.
(I will admit though, I won't put it past corporations to *use* this law as if it was a non-compete, possibly saying you were let in on specific info that could damage the company if you worked at a competitor)
Regulations are finally starting to trickle their way down to the middle class. It sucks.
But instead of forcing OEMs to install this on computers, why not simply have the gov't subsidize free copies on CD Roms that come with the computer, making sure that the installation instructions are as simply as "follow on screen instructions"?
The only thing more frightening than your statement was the speed in which your statement was voted up.
Goverment subsidies only *worsen* the problem. Why are you suddenly requiring taxpayers to pay for the ability of a handful of people to use software?
More importantly, why does everyone think this is a *great* idea? He's advocating a blatant form of socialism that is set to take money *from* you and pay for censorware. I thought this kind of stuff was frowned upon on/.
Cost: $50 to $100 million
People in Texas: 18,673,143 (Source: http://txsdc.tamu.edu/tpepp/2000_txpopprj_county.h tml)
Price per Texan: $2.67 (Rounded DOWN)
This is a ridiculous amount of money to ask from each Texan. This price includes children, who would not be able to pay this, so you'd have to actually charge *more* than $2.67. And this is for software that you most likely would not end up using.
Come on people, catch this kind of crap and don't vote it up. Think about it.
The author of the bill seems to be one fry short of a Happy Meal:
This bill was prompted by SPAM to the author's, Garcia, AOL account popping up porn before being caught by the AOL parental controls.
When I last saw someone use AOL, web integration wasn't around, so my question is: If AOL parental controls can't catch their own program spitting porn, what software did this guy find to do it for him?
And if you really think about it, Dell already ships their computers out with censorware. Last I remember, AOL came on Windows 95, 98, and ME. I haven't checked NT or 2000. If AOL has these parental controls, then that already is a censorware package. (The bill doesn't state that the censorware has to work for any particular ISP, only "the Internet").
Like I said in a previous post, I would not worry about this bill if you live in Texas. It requires buisinesses to act within 30 days, which is too short of a timespan. I would worry if Dell starts seeing this bill as a way to oust competition and promotes it, which they actually might do now that I think about it.
As I've mentioned in the past, I use censorware at home to protect my children when I'm at work. However, I think the installation of such software should be up to the individual computer owner.
Good point, mimics a political party I know of:
www.lp.org
I'd suggest looking into it if you feel this way about most issues.
This is not really newsworthy. Texas politicians will shoot this bill down like a bad habit. Why? Cause Dell and (I believe) Micron have some *serious* pull down there, and they sure as hell aren't going to agree to this.
Plus the bill is attempting to create a "positive right" (one that requires someone to act on your behalf) and those are generally frowned upon in Texas, unless they have something to do with religion.
Check this out:
b) Software provided in compliance with Subsection (a) must be compatible with any operating system that is provided by the seller to the purchaser of the personal computer at the time of purchase. If an operating system is not provided by the seller of the personal computer, the software required under Subsection (a) must be compatible with at least one operating system that may be installed to operate on the computer.
Does censorware even exist for Linux? Doesn't that kind of go against all the foundations *nix OS's are founded upon? I expect this bill to die a horrible, miserable, death.
Slashdot Mirror
A big misconception greens/socialists have about libertarian policies is that we don't like rules because they prevent "profit increases".
This couldn't be furthur from the truth.
So far the two explanations for almost every attack on a economic regulation from a libertarian go as follows:
1) The regulation should be removed because it prevents a free market society.
2) The regulation should be removed because it only furthurs big business reach into our government.
Remember, it isn't until we start passing regulations that affect big business that big business starts interfering in governmental issues.
Just like Andover.net was purchased, VA is cutting back its excess and preparing itself for a buyout of NewsForge, /., etc. blah, blah, blah.
If it isn't already obvious, I'd suggest heading to fsckedcompany.com, which predicted the VA Linux hardware drop last week.
IANAL.
I figured one of these days one of these online storage servers would go down, after all, the highlights of their storage often include nothing but kiddie porn and warez.
The way I look at it, one should be very cautious about where they place important data. Do the captialism check.
Are you paying for storage? No? Then the data, while owned by you, is of no particular concern to the people storing it.
Yes? Then you've got legitimate firepower and can contact others for a class-action lawsuit.
I guess the main thing to consider here is that if the service is free, you're going to have a hard time winning a case on legality issues alone.
If you've paid money, that changes the story entirely, and you'll be able to get action immediately.
Once again, IANAL but this is what I have found to be the case. Just look at Iomega's class action lawsuit for the "click-of-death". They shipped faulty drives that would corrupt disks. Where I work we've lost probably a few thousand dollars to paying to retrieve the data off these disks.
So even if you pay for the storage devices you use, a smart company can get around having to worry about what you claim to be *your* data.
Actually, now that I think about it, this story has nothing to do about who owns the data, but whether or not the free hosting companies should be "responsible" for it.
Well, as far as the items being owned by the University, I think they got you there. I do think you have an argument against explusion. I'd simply tell them that you are sorry that the siutation was something they did not approve of and would like to continue going to the University (on 'double-secret probation' if necessary).
Legally they can expell for any reason whatsoever, but politically they might not want to. Especially if you can garner enough support. (I'm sending them an email in your defense now)
Expelling a student for developing something that several students used, and for learning and making achievements that no other student probably has is something that they may have to answer to if you can get the local student government to back you.
Sorry to give you such a bleak outlook, but this is sometimes what Universities do.
Now I know why. This guy is the opposite of the Microsoft FUD-bunnies that /. readers have grown to loathe. He's trying to scare us, for God know's what reason, into believing MS is going to take over the world. I'm guessing his intent is political in nature, maybe just a way of saying, "Hah you idiots, you voted Bush in, now Microsoft is going to take over."
He couldn't be furhur from the truth.
"The market for Windows servers grew 32 percent this year, while sales of servers running Unix grew only 14 percent."
Yeah, that's great Jon. Unix *is* a dying OS. *Linux* on the other hand was stated in that statistic to be what percent? Oh wait, you didn't include it. Not to mention including the source for that statistic, which would help those of us that have statistics saying NT isn't doing all that well.
Also, what about machines that are bought from Compaq (leader in server sales) and then formatted with a new OS? A number of times they *come* with NT.
Where will Linux be? Studies show a projected 10% growth for 2001.
So anyway, please take what Jon has to say with a grain of salt. He's got no legitimate reason for wanting to spread FUD.
Do you have any more specifics? I'm interested in *where* the site was hosted, *what* you had on it (any university-owned fonts?), and if they had given you any prior warning that you would be in trouble.
I'm empathetic at times, but before I send the University of Utah a nasty email in your defense, I'd like to be certain of the exact situation.
This is good information to have. No longer will we need to rely on people who say "IANAL but ..." but rather say "IANAL but this guy is and he says ...".
Much thanks for all the work.
I've noticed that your site seems to lack some design elements that might make it seem more attractive and less like a "scam" as many have assumed. Do you have any plans for redoing the site design?
I've also noticed that you have an amazing number of advertisments and popups, that add to the "scam" feel that hits the user as they first enter the site. Do you have any plans to change the way you do advertising on the webiste?
And lastly, I've found a page that lists how people can make their own rings. Do you think that this open way of letting people make their own rings may somehow affect your sales?
They can do it MUCH faster at the studios than we can at home.
Just as it takes a long time for them to have the actors and actresses dub their voices to do it in English, there would also be a large amount of time needed for different actresses and actors to do it in Japanese or *insert desired languange*.
Not only that, but we are looking at probably several hours or maybe even days to do the final renders to make these films whole. So the amount of time to get the rendering done while accounting for the voices would end up being a nightmare.
Can anyone explain why scientists would rather *not* have items quarantined? If we have the means capable, might as well do it.
I think some folks might fail to realize that harmful substances from Martian material might burn up in our atmosphere, whereas harmful material would *not* burn up if brought in from a mechanism of human design.
I honestly don't care one way or the other, but I'm trying to determine why we *shouldn't* quarantine material when we have every means necessary to do so.
K5 has a hard enough time as it is. I knew something was up when I couldn't access it right after submitting my first story.
I guess K5 *can* get Slasdotted.
One could argue as such, but indeed that is not the definition of slave. Capitalism gives people choices. Socialism does not.
Happy to see an American that can accept the fact that democracy and socialism can go hand in hand.
They always do till a point, and inevitably socialism always overtakes democracy when one person will appoint themselves head of a nation. It is very easy for this to happen since in a socialist country you cannot have property rights. Actually *read* Marx's writings sometimes, I think you'd be suprised at how evil the man really was. He wanted all property collectively owned. He wanted newborn children taken from their parents to prevent them from being influenced by them.
Funny, you sound like a typical American to me... So go ahead, you abolish the income tax, the minimum wage, medicare, welfare, you get more money in your pocket, and then what?
Then actual working people will live a happy, productive life, while those that are incompetent and lazy will suffer horribly. Welfare would turn back to what it used to be before FDR, with communities and other charitable organizations taking care of the poor and helping them get back on their feet, rather than the government cutting out paychecks so people can get by.
Capitalist Utopia is no better than Communist Utopia.
And here is where you fail to have structured any point. Not only that, but you seem to have shown a favor toward communism over socialism. Oh boy..
Communism entails building buildings and breaking them down so you can build them again since everyone is entitled to a job. No one has any chance of moving up in the world, and no choice is given on what you can eat. You are appropriated what you need to survive.
That's a real fun world. I think I'm done arguing as you haven't the competence to keep up with me.
Lo and behold the day when the ardent socialist realizes that big business is now using his policies to eliminate competition.
Cybersquatting was the least of people's problems. Get ready for some serious fighting over names of Internet sites.
Indeed we are. David Held (who some socialists refer to as a God) has commented that since FDR the US *has* indeed been a socialist country. His evidence comes from the capitalist system built upon socialist government roots especially in the areas of Research and Development. Large numbers of US universities are funded using taxpayer money. These universities then partially sell their services in R&D to capital enterprises.
We have something in the United States called Corporate Welfare, where businesses can apply to get money from the government. This is *NOT* capitalism, as the general rule of capitalism is to let failed businesses die. Big businesses are also reaching into Corporate Welfare money.
We have a minimum wage, which is something a capitalist country should not have. Businesses in the United States pay little or no taxes while employees pay around 40% to income tax, people don't think they are paying that much because they are told the business pays half, and they pay half. But employers would be able to afford 40% more in each of their respective salaries if income tax was abolished.
You are extremely wrong about welfare and social security. I can't even begin to address your lack of competence in this area. The citizens of this country *do* believe in them, that is why they haven't scraped either program yet. Only a hanful more believe it isn't working properly, but definately *not* the majority.
My social values are *not* a strong army and *not* a tax cut for the rich. In these two areas you have my position gravely mistaken. I would like to see an army of volunteers only, with perhaps a handful of paid positions. And rather than a tax cut for the rich, I would like to see an income tax elimination across the board, where *no one* pays taxes. After all, that'd be the only fair way, right?
Or maybe I'm wrong, you seem to have fallen into the trap of "tax cut for the rich". I'd like you to go ahead and reason this out for me. Granted, you *can* reason that the Bush (who I don't like) plan is a tax cut for the rich, but it definately does not benefit them percentage-wise more than any other American. It is only because they pay more of their income to taxes that they appear to be recieving the best deal.
And I feel really sorry for you if you bought into Gore's statements regarding the Bush tax plan.
You are right, a multi-billion dollar space shield is a complete waste of money. Here again is the will of the majority at work, something that in your socialist enviroment is perfectely acceptable.
Did you know that there is enough money being put into welfare that the United States government could cut everyone on it a 40,000 dollar check each year? You know why this will never happen? Because welfare now employees several million people across the country, whose incomes you are now paying for.
"I don't like the idea of filthy rich people existing next to people that don't even own there own life."
Capitalism in and of itself requires that people compete in a market with equal ability to make decisions. Someone who is enslaved to another person is limited in their ability to make decisions in the market, therefore slavery is *not* acceptable.
In a truly capitalist enviroment each individual is reponsible for their own success, so if anyone is wealthy, it is because they got there, not because they inherited it through a tax-free system while everyone else had to pay them.
Americans are always portrayed as bloodthirsty, gutless, soulless people. I personally don't care how I'm viewed, I definately have a different outlook on life than everyone else. Especially different than those in the majority of this country.
Because wealth and stupidity are totally independent of each other in a capitalistic system. In all fairness you fail to mention two very important things in your .sig troll:
1) "So many" is not very clear. Are you implying millions, thousands, or hundreds?
2) The current economic system in (what I'm assuming you're talking about) the United States only retains small hints of what used to be a capitalist structure.
I don't mind ardent socialists on /. or k5, I do mind their mistaken and oft misleading .sig's.
1) One word : Ebay
2) So what is it then?
1) You are implying that it is "stupid" to pay large amounts of money for something that the majority of people find a waste of money. If this is the case, why does the government (an extension of the will of the majority) continue to invest in programs that are failures, most notably welfare and social security?
For example: I don't see much use in an Ultima Online account that I spent time developing. I sell my character and it goes for thousands of dollars. *You*, and perhaps a majority of individuals, will look at the sale as something that signifies stupidity on the part of the wealthy party that bought the account.
*I* see the purchase made as a great benefit to myself as I can use the cash. The purchaser sees the purchase as worthwhile since the money means nothing to them, they value the time spent in the character moreso than the few thousand they are paying to obtain it.
The majority of the people in this country feel that it is the responsibility of the "collective soul" to take care of those less fortunate. Thus they work to implement programs that will do so.
I view this as a failure from the start, as individuals are better able to manage their own finances than any collective body of people who will inevitably feed off the money they are given themselves.
Because my view is held in the minority my views default to "evil" and the views of the majority are set at "good". It is the assurance that "everything will be fine" that is enough to please the majority, but I demand more reasoning and logic.
You may feel fine living in a world where "majority rules" but the truth is, there is always an issue where you will be in the minority.
2) In line with the majority/minority spiel I just gave, I think it will suffice to say that we live in a twisted socialistic economy, but are taught in school that it is a capitalistic enviroment. I have a feeling you were poorly educated on what capitalism really is and are only lashing out against it because it is the cool thing to do.
Please wise up and offer complete arguments regarding your views on capitalism, I'd be interested in hearing what you have to say.
Because wealth and stupidity are totally independent of each other in a capitalistic system. In all fairness you fail to mention two very important things in your .sig troll:
1) "So many" is not very clear. Are you implying millions, thousands, or hundreds?
2) The current economic system in (what I'm assuming you're talking about) the United States only retains small hints of what used to be a capitalist structure.
I don't mind ardent socialists on /. or k5, I do mind their mistaken and oft misleading .sig's.
I attended a LAN party where a guy came in and hooked up his computer, monitor, and speakers and then asked if there was a fourth outlet he could use.
Everyone glanced at us when I loudly asked, "You don't have a Voodoo5 do you?!?".
He sheepishly packed up his computer and left.
In 12 months the price will be what, half it is now? Still too high for this potential customer.
If current games are any indication of what to expect I doubt I'll be buying any for some time:
Counter-Strike (a Half-Life modification) is filling up with egotistical people who think a year is a long time to have been playing the game.
Quake3 was a *big* disappointment. Especially with CTF, where there is no grapple and there are bottomless pits that do instant kills, stuff you didn't see in Quake2 CTF, probably the biggest mod for the Quake trilogy. Rocket arena is impressive, but doesn't have quite the same loyal following.
Baldur's Gate series and the various MMORPGS just use graphics as eye-candy to lure 30-something year old men and women who are into fantasizing and playing roles, the meat of the games often misses the point of stratetic play, and they are a big downer for those of us hoping for more.
Sacrifice is, IMHO, the best game to have come out to take advantage of what some of the new graphics cards can do. Unfortunately for the rest of us, developers like Shiny are dropping the PC platform and now going back to console programming.
I hate to say it, but it looks like the future of gaming is going to rest back in the hands of consoles. I guess they finally figured out broadband was the device to attract users who used to use consoles before computers.
Only problem is that I don't want to go back to consoles. Guess I'm just screwed. Hell awaits me.
Why is everyone rambling about non-competes? This is an article regarding trade secrets and reasons why you can work at a competitor.
What I like about trade secret arguments for you not leaving one job to work at another is that they put the responsibility of proof on the previous employer. Where non-competes can only be disolved if you take the initiative.
Trade secret stuff is a no brainer for those that have jobs in IT. You can't take PHP code from one business and goto a competitor to work on it. Even if you are fired and are really pissed at your boss.
Anway, saying "looks like you can get screwed even if you don't sign a non-compete" is a very inappropriate thing to put in a news blurb on here. Especially since this has been around for a while and was intended to stop unethical business pratices.
(I will admit though, I won't put it past corporations to *use* this law as if it was a non-compete, possibly saying you were let in on specific info that could damage the company if you worked at a competitor)
Regulations are finally starting to trickle their way down to the middle class. It sucks.
Oops.. Indeed I did..
Still a really high price for what you get. Especially when current filtering software lets me get around the ads anyway.
But instead of forcing OEMs to install this on computers, why not simply have the gov't subsidize free copies on CD Roms that come with the computer, making sure that the installation instructions are as simply as "follow on screen instructions"?
The only thing more frightening than your statement was the speed in which your statement was voted up.
Goverment subsidies only *worsen* the problem. Why are you suddenly requiring taxpayers to pay for the ability of a handful of people to use software?
More importantly, why does everyone think this is a *great* idea? He's advocating a blatant form of socialism that is set to take money *from* you and pay for censorware. I thought this kind of stuff was frowned upon on /.
Cost: $50 to $100 millionh tml)
People in Texas: 18,673,143 (Source: http://txsdc.tamu.edu/tpepp/2000_txpopprj_county.
Price per Texan: $2.67 (Rounded DOWN)
This is a ridiculous amount of money to ask from each Texan. This price includes children, who would not be able to pay this, so you'd have to actually charge *more* than $2.67. And this is for software that you most likely would not end up using.
Come on people, catch this kind of crap and don't vote it up. Think about it.
The author of the bill seems to be one fry short of a Happy Meal:
This bill was prompted by SPAM to the author's, Garcia, AOL account popping up porn before being caught by the AOL parental controls.
When I last saw someone use AOL, web integration wasn't around, so my question is: If AOL parental controls can't catch their own program spitting porn, what software did this guy find to do it for him?
And if you really think about it, Dell already ships their computers out with censorware. Last I remember, AOL came on Windows 95, 98, and ME. I haven't checked NT or 2000. If AOL has these parental controls, then that already is a censorware package. (The bill doesn't state that the censorware has to work for any particular ISP, only "the Internet").
Like I said in a previous post, I would not worry about this bill if you live in Texas. It requires buisinesses to act within 30 days, which is too short of a timespan. I would worry if Dell starts seeing this bill as a way to oust competition and promotes it, which they actually might do now that I think about it.
As I've mentioned in the past, I use censorware at home to protect my children when I'm at work. However, I think the installation of such software should be up to the individual computer owner.
Good point, mimics a political party I know of:
www.lp.org
I'd suggest looking into it if you feel this way about most issues.
This is not really newsworthy. Texas politicians will shoot this bill down like a bad habit. Why? Cause Dell and (I believe) Micron have some *serious* pull down there, and they sure as hell aren't going to agree to this.
Plus the bill is attempting to create a "positive right" (one that requires someone to act on your behalf) and those are generally frowned upon in Texas, unless they have something to do with religion. Check this out:
b) Software provided in compliance with Subsection (a) must be compatible with any operating system that is provided by the seller to the purchaser of the personal computer at the time of purchase. If an operating system is not provided by the seller of the personal computer, the software required under Subsection (a) must be compatible with at least one operating system that may be installed to operate on the computer.
Does censorware even exist for Linux? Doesn't that kind of go against all the foundations *nix OS's are founded upon? I expect this bill to die a horrible, miserable, death.