You are correct, was thinking of governer races (and not all are that way, Arizona give it to whoever just gets the most votes). Brain fart, thanks for the correction.
But once again, this is ONLY for president. Not congress, which was the target for the original comments.
I can understand both arguements for the electoral college, the primary benefit is to smaller states who would be practically irrelevent in most elections. I would be inclined to leave it the way it is, if for no other reason than as broke as it is, the alternative may be more broken.
Yeah, the US has a real democracy, you'll can pick one of 2 'different' corporate-puppet-on-a-string dictators every 4 years.
You can vote for anyone in America. You can write in anyone's name you choose. You can vote for Mickey Mouse if you choose. America is NOT a two party system. It has two strong parties and several smaller parties, but its not setup for 2 parties only.
And you should really do something about all that bitterness. Its not good for you.
The problem with the US system is that people are just inclined to stick to voting for major powerbases, that they know and (rightly or wrongly) trust, so you end up with 2 parties that have a hope in hell of being elected. What's needed is for the elected persons to be held accountable for _everything_ they do. That's where Accountabilitarianism [game-point.net] comes in.
I support Recall myself. Many states have provisions for recall, but most don't, especially on the federal level. Gov. Grey Davis is sweating out a potential recall as we speak, for instance. I lived in Arizona during the Gov. Meachum recall (he was recalled, and kicked out of office). It works.
Why don't one of you whiners do something like stand for election youselves, instead of posting about it on Slashdot?
The whole idea of a Democratic Republic (like the US)is to elect people to represent our interests, not necessarily to vote the same way we would. Complaining about the way our Congress votes on a matter isn't whining, its political expression. The whole idea of individuals speaking out freely where our representatives can see, in the hopes to influence their votes is the whole idea behind America. Free speech is not just so you can complain TO the government, but about it to others to influence them as well.
With all due respect, you seem to miss that point entirely with your overreaction to something most of us consider important: The right to bitch about our elected officials. Newspapers express political opinions that are not directed only to the elected officials. So do TV, radio and internet news sites. People discuss politics in barbershops, cafe's and even on online posting news sites, like Slashdot. It lets other hear it, it has the potential to influence.
In our society, complaining IS doing something. Implying that someone should either run for office or shut up is so against free speech, that I surprised to even hear you say it. If you don't want to hear opinions, then I suggest you stay off Slashdot.
In case you didn't notice: the US's electoral system promotes a 2 party system. starting a new party won't accomplish a thing, it's winner takes all.
I don't agree that the electoral college promotes any particular system with respect to congress. Your comments are simply wrong.
Your vote for congress, house or senate, had nothing to do with the electoral college, it has only to do with how many votes are in a district and nothing more. The electoral college has exactly NO bearing.
It is NOT winner take all either. We could have 15 political parties for president, and it does NOT go to whoever gets the most electoral votes, it goes to whoever gets over 50% of the total votes. It would require a run off election. Not all states use this system for state elections, but the presidency absolutely does. Also, some state can BREAK UP their electoral votes, Vermont I believe does this, so its not winner take all there either. State have the option of breaking up their electoral votes according to the count (ie: 4 electoral votes, 50 vote for A, 25% for B, 25% for C, then A gets 2, B gets 1, C gets 1) There are no federal laws regulating this, this power is reserved exclusively for the states to decide how to carve up their electoral votes.
Almost every law regarding federal elections is STATE law in the U.S., asside from 14th Amendment issues (equal protection) and sufferage issues. This is covered in the 10th amendment. This is also why some states had 'pole taxes' (later found unconstitutional) and others did not.
Everyone bitches about the electoral college, but outside of the presidency, it has no bearing whatsoever on any election.
Re:May as well be the first to say it
on
AOL Sues Spammers
·
· Score: 1
All it takes is a few whole-scale invasions for "the enemy of the enemy is my freind" to kick in again, and a band of dictators, seeing that the US is serious about assassinating the leaders of these countries in addition to invading the countries, get together to launch a real attack on America
I see your point, but they already did this on 9-11. Like I said, Iran and N. Korea are good examples of where to NOT just invade. Siria will probably either cooperate, or find a few select targets hit (camps, not govt. buildings). Although I prefer mutual respect, sometimes the fear of us turning them into a parking lot has to suffice. This corner of our globe has acheived tremendous wealth, but not through education, conquest or hard work, but from a hole in the ground. This has led to more money than common sense in some of the governments. Some people just don't understand the 'carrot' approach, which is why the stick comes in handy.
Already Saudi Arabia and Qatar are introducing and/or talking about democratic reforms. Granted, this won't lead to anything truly democratic, but its a SEED. Freedom grows like a week, once it gets established, its hard to get rid of. The main point is at least they are moving in that direction, and while they are terrible examples of government, they are not AS oppressive as Iraq was. Women still are not allowed to drive in Saudi Arabia, for instance.
Had we not gone in and rolled over Saddam, these tiny reforms would not have happened at all. Its a start. It also helps to push other countries in the same direction. Momentum.
Arabs liking us is not my biggest concern, although it would make many things easier. With this region, its easy to make friends when you are perceived as strong anyway. We don't like the French very well, but there is no chance of a war with them.
OT, but did you hear about the French military rifle for sale on Ebay? "Never fired, only dropped once.".....
People keep mentioning that link. What they fail to realize is that both of these articles were written by the same person.
That or they don't care because the one with pix of the girl in the panties is just more interesting. I don't think literary style was the main motivator for people reading it.
I mean really, "Gender Equity in Gaming" is not exactly the hottest conversational topic. On the other hand, a "I used my controller for a sex toy" story could have been written in crayon and no one would have cared. I am not sure what matters that the same person wrote both.
I understood you were not taking the point as far as I had, its just once you start placing restrictions, its easier to add more than it is to remove them. Its a very slippery slope.
I have always believed that screwed up companies take care of themselves. IBM had the anti-trust suit of the 70s and 80s, but by the time it ended, their own actions and the market forces that resulted had already pushed them back to a less dominating force. Its why I don't my panties in a wad over Microsoft or AOL. Not that I don't like their policies, its just the bigger you get, the easier you fall, so the energy is best spent on the solution rather than the problem.
Placing any restrictions on Linux or the trademark would not serve the community well, even if its to prevent a 'bad company' from using it. It would end up creating more ill will, mistrust and uncertainty, and in the end slowing down its adoption. Remember, if you didn't have bad guys, you couldn't have good guys. Every coin has two sides.
I'll never forget my dad's advice: "Just remember to clip-on once you get to the top of the telephone pole, falling would really suck.":) (I'm not joking, he really told me this)
So, how often did they let you visit your dad in prison?:)
Jeez. I thought the/. crowd was supposed to be a bit intellectual, but most of the posts I've read about this thus far are mostly knee-jerk, anti-PC, mysogony....The article isn't claiming that she feels victimized or 'whining' about the portrayal of the female body. It's actually quite good,
Let me help you out. First of all, this is slashdot. My guess is 20% of the people actually read the articles. About 1/4 to 1/3 of the time, its because the article has been slashdotted, so they cant get to it. Some people treat not reading the article like a badge of honor.
The funny thing is, more people probably read THIS LINK instead, about the game girl vibrator, including image of girl in panties using it.
As much as nerds love reading, they love porn more.
A marketing friend of mine had another point to add.. rebates give the seller a two tier customer base: Rich customers will pay the higher price and not bother with the rebate. Poorer customers will buy the product and use the rebate, but you still get the sale. It's a way of extracting the most possible money out of a mixed customer base.
Good point, very valid. I know some are going to get outraged about this, and some call it morally wrong, but they miss the bigger point when they do. I have no tolorance for companies that do not pay off on their rebates, or rip people off. I am against lying in ads, and support any legislation that forces truth in advertising. This is different that what we are talking about. If you don't redeem a rebate, its usually your own fault.
Another point to ponder: The reason every town has a used car salesman named "Honest Ed" that runs TV ads with him in a cowboy hat screaming "come on down!" is because this method works. Period. People expect it, and everything else doesn't sink in. Stimuli / Response. It sells stuff. Most of these guys are actually honest businessmen.
The best marketing plan always has some flash, glitter, showbiz or entertainment mixed in. Its what people want, expect, and respond to. Instant rebates have a role in this.
Marketing: Propaganda and manipulation intended to make fools think something is worth more than it really is.
Regular Price: A completely outlandish sum that no one would ever or does ever pay for an item.
Sale: It used to mean when the products are a little less of a ripoff than usual, but since everything is always on "sale" now, it is very common to find something on "sale" at "50% savings" that is still a major ripoff and can be found at other stores for much less.
Value: The lowest possible price at which the item can be legally obtained by a consumer. Commonly misquoted at 3-4 times reality.
Only when its done correctly.
Its good to have a healthy disrespect for your own career field, which I do. Its much better than smug self-rightousness.
Yeah, one good thing about phreaking was that it got you OUT OF THE HOUSE!
Well yea, so does car jacking, volunteering for charity or skateboarding, but I don't think mom is gonna tell little Johnie to take his blue box, and go outside and get some fresh air....
What the hell is the point of having instant rebates instead of just lowering the price?
It called Marketing. As the resident evil capitalist, please allow me to explain...
1. They can be used to 'not' lower the price for price matching policies. "Yea, you bought it last week but the price is still $100, we just have a rebate. We can't give you the rebate if you bought then."
2. They can be used to make people think that the factory is giving us this money, its not that we are overcharging you the rest of the time. "Its $100, before a $50 rebate, but we would lose money if we sold it for $50" Really, Im not making it up. I get paid for this stuff.
3. Sense of urgency. Its for a limited time only. This is true for all sales, but with rebates, the message, and response is stronger. "act now or miss out".
4. Convenience. Rebates are dubious at best, but with an 'instant rebate' you know you can't get ripped off. So its a better value, because there is no risk. Even though it IS the same as reducing the price, it is called "transfering the risk" to the seller, instead of to you. It works.
5. Its a different kind of sale. All sales are good. Very often, an instant rebate is used on NEW items at their introductory price. IE: This item is $150 with a $50 instant rebate. After the rebate is gone, we put it on sale for $100.
Its all marketing, thats all. The above may not make sense to some of you. Good. Thats the idea. Many of you will smugly say that the above is stupid. Thats good, too. The more 'stupid' you think these sales tricks are, the more likely you are to fall for them. I'm not making it up either, it REALLY does work that way. But that is why they (we) do instant rebates: Because it works very very well, especially for quazi impulse purchases.
Remember boys and girls, you do NOT have to be evil to be in Marketing, but it helps.;) Trust me (and who wouldn't?), its what I have done for a living for around 20 years now.
I can assure you that I am not trolling, spreading FUD, or any of those things. This is a valid point that I've not seen brought up, and is the reason I do not include OpenOffice in Slackware (believe me, there are a lot of requests). I'd love to be shown how I'm wrong about this.
Feel free to Google for OpenOffice's build requirements, and then follow the link to the gpc site.
I assumed your were wrong because what you were saying defies all logic, but the fact is, I was totally wrong. I mean, to use that license in OO would be stupid right?;) Starting reading at your suggestion, and Im even more confused.
Now that I have freely admitted that I had stuck my foot in my mouth, 95% of the people who NEED this/similar software us it in a commercial environment, so this is kinda dumb.
Is this being "fixed", as in removing GPC code and replacing it to make OO truly GPL? Im a bit shocked that the dev team has let the code mix this way, knowing that OO can't be used where it was designed to be used. Considering I was expecting to migrate everyone over to OO (linux and windows) the next cycle (summer) this puts a wrench in the works.
Since you're using OpenOffice at your company, you might be interested to know that you could be in violation of the gpc (general polygon clipping library) license. gpc, which is often mistaken for a GNU item since it starts with a 'g', is required to build OpenOffice. However (and I've never seen this mentioned or reported anywhere), it comes with a very restrictive 'non-commercial-use' license. Presumably anything linked with it (like OpenOffice) should also be considered for 'non-commercial-use' only as well, right?
You are so full of poo for trying to start a troll.
You should see some of the internal letters written by him during that period (retrieved by the FOIA). They are frightening at best.
Oh, Im not saying have blind trust for sure, and I see potential pitfalls. I can't say who or shouldn't be in that position, but I tend to think people who were good at developing technology to violate your privacy would be better than say, Ned Flanders.;)
I am not ready to trust my privacy with much anyone, but if I have to, I would prefer someone who has been in the commercial world, and better if they have some history LIKE this.
To me, putting an inexperienced person without a full understand what they are up against is potentially more fretful, or at best ineffectual.
Yea, thats a good idea. Lets limit who can access Linux. Maybe we should have it where you have to get a license to make changes, that way we can keep them out. Or maybe we should just not let them have the source to begin with, so they can't change it. Or maybe, just not let anyone look at it, unless they sign a statement saying they won't release it to anyone else.
I tend to think that the best person to do the job probably IS someone who has abused the shit out of the system.
Who is better at helping you make your house burgular proof, a novice, or an ex con?
This guy may be somewhat of an ex con, but he has to work in the public view, so I say give him a chance. He is going to know more tricks about privacy violations that the rest of us put together. Its better to have him working FOR us, than ON us.
But don't forget that Microsoft's job is to lock you into their platform. It sounds very neat that you don't care about politics (OSS vs. MS) but you seem to forget that MS does and will do what it can to lock users in.
No, not at all, it is the reason I am working so hard to change over to Linux. Politics aside, it would be a bad business decision for me to continue with Microsoft considering the direction they are going in.
So why would you care if the employees bitch about it?
Because employees matter. They are the main force behind profitability. Even if I didn't care what they think, it makes financial sense to keep them motivated. Any business that doesn't really care about their employees doesn't stay in business very long. They are more important than all our computers put together, no contest.
Some of you need to realize that most of us in the business world want the best software for the $
Really? Maybe that's why linux is gaining ground?
I agree. Its almost cost effective enough to switch on the desktop. Enough so that I am currently investing money to test and begin moving as many stations as I can to Linux. Its not ready to move everything TODAY (for me) but we expect to be 100% Microsoft free in 2 years.
Is a secure sytem even a priority for you?
Yes. Our servers are all 100% GNU/Linux. All our Windows boxes are behind a Linux firewall. All our very sensitive data is off the TCP/IP network if on a Windows box, and we are moving all sensitive data off windows boxes as fast as reasonably possible (hense the migration).
Can you get work done if your business data has been erased by an attacker? How much money can you make if you can't use your computers because they are busy with performing a DDoS attack?
All the systems that really REQUIRE windows, graphics stations, etc., do NOT have any sensitive customer data and the graphics are backed up to CD and one of our Linux servers, so a catastrophic loss would do minimal damage. We still keep a paper copy of every transaction as a backup to our computers (in addition to onsite and offsite backups).
Its not perfect, but (knock on wood) we have never had a virus, trojan, hacker get in our system. Like I said, we are migrating to Linux as rapidly as financially smart for US. We have never used Outlook, etc. or any Windows server products.
I like Linux and use it daily, but like most business decision makers, I am going to migrate at a pace that makes sense for my company. Until then, we have taken extraordinary steps to insure data security, and since we haven't had a single breach in the 9 years I have been there, I tend to think we are at least treading water.
It would be very difficult for anyone to tell me I am wrong when they have no idea what industry I am in, thus not understand my needs or the amount and type of information we store.
Re:May as well be the first to say it
on
AOL Sues Spammers
·
· Score: 1
If the population of the US is so gullable that they buy this liberation crap, go right ahead, but don't bitch at the rest of us who can see through the incredibly transparant veil of spin-doctoring to see the truth that this liberation crap is just a bunch of bullshit cooked up at the last second to cover their asses.
I will gladly admit that liberation was a secondary reason at best. I support the primary reason: The asshole had lots of weapons, and not enough money, and there are lots of people who may not like him, but like us LESS and would gladly put up with him long enough to buy weapons. In that part of the world, the idea that "The enemy of my enemy is my friend" is very valid. I supported and voted for Ross BECAUSE we had not gone in and finished the job by liberating Iraq to begin with. I was a founding member of United We Stand, and had a multiline BBS very much dedicated to politics after our failure to free them. Many frieds were in Desert Storm. I am a vet. My father spent 21 years in, including in Korea and Vietname. Iraq has been on my mind a very long time, and I AM aware of the risks and rewards.
I am STILL glad we liberated the Iraqi's and my opinion is we need to do the unthinkable: Liberate others and educate their women. I say we SHOULD go and liberate other countries. It is preferable to do it without military force, but what ever it takes. Iran and N. Korea are good examples where military force would probably be the WORST way to liberate. Siria could go either way. Saudi Arabia is a sticky problem too. But free people generally don't support terrorism.
I don't appologize for thinking we need to liberate MORE countries rather than less. Liberation is almost never the primary reason, but it IS the lasting consequence that prevents further problems. For my money, liberation is a good thing, even if you don't agree with the primary reasons for going in. You disagree. Thats fine. Isn't it great we both live in free countries where its ok to debate this?
Any country that doesn't allow you and I to freely and openly discuss and disagree about this would be on my short list.
Slashdot Mirror
What does private use mean? ;-)
I guess it means you can't use it on your "pay for porno" site.
You are correct, was thinking of governer races (and not all are that way, Arizona give it to whoever just gets the most votes). Brain fart, thanks for the correction.
But once again, this is ONLY for president. Not congress, which was the target for the original comments.
I can understand both arguements for the electoral college, the primary benefit is to smaller states who would be practically irrelevent in most elections. I would be inclined to leave it the way it is, if for no other reason than as broke as it is, the alternative may be more broken.
Yeah, the US has a real democracy, you'll can pick one of 2 'different' corporate-puppet-on-a-string dictators every 4 years.
You can vote for anyone in America. You can write in anyone's name you choose. You can vote for Mickey Mouse if you choose. America is NOT a two party system. It has two strong parties and several smaller parties, but its not setup for 2 parties only.
And you should really do something about all that bitterness. Its not good for you.
The problem with the US system is that people are just inclined to stick to voting for major powerbases, that they know and (rightly or wrongly) trust, so you end up with 2 parties that have a hope in hell of being elected. What's needed is for the elected persons to be held accountable for _everything_ they do. That's where Accountabilitarianism [game-point.net] comes in.
I support Recall myself. Many states have provisions for recall, but most don't, especially on the federal level. Gov. Grey Davis is sweating out a potential recall as we speak, for instance. I lived in Arizona during the Gov. Meachum recall (he was recalled, and kicked out of office). It works.
Why don't one of you whiners do something like stand for election youselves, instead of posting about it on Slashdot?
The whole idea of a Democratic Republic (like the US)is to elect people to represent our interests, not necessarily to vote the same way we would. Complaining about the way our Congress votes on a matter isn't whining, its political expression. The whole idea of individuals speaking out freely where our representatives can see, in the hopes to influence their votes is the whole idea behind America. Free speech is not just so you can complain TO the government, but about it to others to influence them as well.
With all due respect, you seem to miss that point entirely with your overreaction to something most of us consider important: The right to bitch about our elected officials. Newspapers express political opinions that are not directed only to the elected officials. So do TV, radio and internet news sites. People discuss politics in barbershops, cafe's and even on online posting news sites, like Slashdot. It lets other hear it, it has the potential to influence.
In our society, complaining IS doing something. Implying that someone should either run for office or shut up is so against free speech, that I surprised to even hear you say it. If you don't want to hear opinions, then I suggest you stay off Slashdot.
In case you didn't notice: the US's electoral system promotes a 2 party system. starting a new party won't accomplish a thing, it's winner takes all.
I don't agree that the electoral college promotes any particular system with respect to congress. Your comments are simply wrong.
Your vote for congress, house or senate, had nothing to do with the electoral college, it has only to do with how many votes are in a district and nothing more. The electoral college has exactly NO bearing.
It is NOT winner take all either. We could have 15 political parties for president, and it does NOT go to whoever gets the most electoral votes, it goes to whoever gets over 50% of the total votes. It would require a run off election. Not all states use this system for state elections, but the presidency absolutely does. Also, some state can BREAK UP their electoral votes, Vermont I believe does this, so its not winner take all there either. State have the option of breaking up their electoral votes according to the count (ie: 4 electoral votes, 50 vote for A, 25% for B, 25% for C, then A gets 2, B gets 1, C gets 1) There are no federal laws regulating this, this power is reserved exclusively for the states to decide how to carve up their electoral votes.
Almost every law regarding federal elections is STATE law in the U.S., asside from 14th Amendment issues (equal protection) and sufferage issues. This is covered in the 10th amendment. This is also why some states had 'pole taxes' (later found unconstitutional) and others did not.
Everyone bitches about the electoral college, but outside of the presidency, it has no bearing whatsoever on any election.
All it takes is a few whole-scale invasions for "the enemy of the enemy is my freind" to kick in again, and a band of dictators, seeing that the US is serious about assassinating the leaders of these countries in addition to invading the countries, get together to launch a real attack on America
I see your point, but they already did this on 9-11. Like I said, Iran and N. Korea are good examples of where to NOT just invade. Siria will probably either cooperate, or find a few select targets hit (camps, not govt. buildings). Although I prefer mutual respect, sometimes the fear of us turning them into a parking lot has to suffice. This corner of our globe has acheived tremendous wealth, but not through education, conquest or hard work, but from a hole in the ground. This has led to more money than common sense in some of the governments. Some people just don't understand the 'carrot' approach, which is why the stick comes in handy.
Already Saudi Arabia and Qatar are introducing and/or talking about democratic reforms. Granted, this won't lead to anything truly democratic, but its a SEED. Freedom grows like a week, once it gets established, its hard to get rid of. The main point is at least they are moving in that direction, and while they are terrible examples of government, they are not AS oppressive as Iraq was. Women still are not allowed to drive in Saudi Arabia, for instance.
Had we not gone in and rolled over Saddam, these tiny reforms would not have happened at all. Its a start. It also helps to push other countries in the same direction. Momentum.
Arabs liking us is not my biggest concern, although it would make many things easier. With this region, its easy to make friends when you are perceived as strong anyway. We don't like the French very well, but there is no chance of a war with them.
OT, but did you hear about the French military rifle for sale on Ebay? "Never fired, only dropped once.".....
People keep mentioning that link. What they fail to realize is that both of these articles were written by the same person.
That or they don't care because the one with pix of the girl in the panties is just more interesting. I don't think literary style was the main motivator for people reading it.
I mean really, "Gender Equity in Gaming" is not exactly the hottest conversational topic. On the other hand, a "I used my controller for a sex toy" story could have been written in crayon and no one would have cared. I am not sure what matters that the same person wrote both.
I understood you were not taking the point as far as I had, its just once you start placing restrictions, its easier to add more than it is to remove them. Its a very slippery slope.
I have always believed that screwed up companies take care of themselves. IBM had the anti-trust suit of the 70s and 80s, but by the time it ended, their own actions and the market forces that resulted had already pushed them back to a less dominating force. Its why I don't my panties in a wad over Microsoft or AOL. Not that I don't like their policies, its just the bigger you get, the easier you fall, so the energy is best spent on the solution rather than the problem.
Placing any restrictions on Linux or the trademark would not serve the community well, even if its to prevent a 'bad company' from using it. It would end up creating more ill will, mistrust and uncertainty, and in the end slowing down its adoption. Remember, if you didn't have bad guys, you couldn't have good guys. Every coin has two sides.
I'll never forget my dad's advice: "Just remember to clip-on once you get to the top of the telephone pole, falling would really suck." :)
:)
(I'm not joking, he really told me this)
So, how often did they let you visit your dad in prison?
Jeez. I thought the /. crowd was supposed to be a bit intellectual, but most of the posts I've read about this thus far are mostly knee-jerk, anti-PC, mysogony....The article isn't claiming that she feels victimized or 'whining' about the portrayal of the female body. It's actually quite good,
Let me help you out. First of all, this is slashdot. My guess is 20% of the people actually read the articles. About 1/4 to 1/3 of the time, its because the article has been slashdotted, so they cant get to it. Some people treat not reading the article like a badge of honor.
The funny thing is, more people probably read THIS LINK instead, about the game girl vibrator, including image of girl in panties using it.
As much as nerds love reading, they love porn more.
Damn fine link. Mod that guy up. That was pretty much unexpected.
Bad ass yes, sexy no. I never was "into" pixels myself.
:)
yea, and all that anime is viewed by people who are purely artistic minded, too.
(suppressing laughter)
A marketing friend of mine had another point to add .. rebates give the seller a two tier customer base: Rich customers will pay the higher price and not bother with the rebate. Poorer customers will buy the product and use the rebate, but you still get the sale. It's a way of extracting the most possible money out of a mixed customer base.
Good point, very valid. I know some are going to get outraged about this, and some call it morally wrong, but they miss the bigger point when they do. I have no tolorance for companies that do not pay off on their rebates, or rip people off. I am against lying in ads, and support any legislation that forces truth in advertising. This is different that what we are talking about. If you don't redeem a rebate, its usually your own fault.
Another point to ponder: The reason every town has a used car salesman named "Honest Ed" that runs TV ads with him in a cowboy hat screaming "come on down!" is because this method works. Period. People expect it, and everything else doesn't sink in. Stimuli / Response. It sells stuff. Most of these guys are actually honest businessmen.
The best marketing plan always has some flash, glitter, showbiz or entertainment mixed in. Its what people want, expect, and respond to. Instant rebates have a role in this.
Now for some definitions:
Marketing: Propaganda and manipulation intended to make fools think something is worth more than it really is.
Regular Price: A completely outlandish sum that no one would ever or does ever pay for an item.
Sale: It used to mean when the products are a little less of a ripoff than usual, but since everything is always on "sale" now, it is very common to find something on "sale" at "50% savings" that is still a major ripoff and can be found at other stores for much less.
Value: The lowest possible price at which the item can be legally obtained by a consumer. Commonly misquoted at 3-4 times reality.
Only when its done correctly.
Its good to have a healthy disrespect for your own career field, which I do. Its much better than smug self-rightousness.
Yeah, one good thing about phreaking was that it got you OUT OF THE HOUSE!
Well yea, so does car jacking, volunteering for charity or skateboarding, but I don't think mom is gonna tell little Johnie to take his blue box, and go outside and get some fresh air....
Did you even read the article?
New here, huh?
What the hell is the point of having instant rebates instead of just lowering the price?
;) Trust me (and who wouldn't?), its what I have done for a living for around 20 years now.
It called Marketing. As the resident evil capitalist, please allow me to explain...
1. They can be used to 'not' lower the price for price matching policies. "Yea, you bought it last week but the price is still $100, we just have a rebate. We can't give you the rebate if you bought then."
2. They can be used to make people think that the factory is giving us this money, its not that we are overcharging you the rest of the time. "Its $100, before a $50 rebate, but we would lose money if we sold it for $50" Really, Im not making it up. I get paid for this stuff.
3. Sense of urgency. Its for a limited time only. This is true for all sales, but with rebates, the message, and response is stronger. "act now or miss out".
4. Convenience. Rebates are dubious at best, but with an 'instant rebate' you know you can't get ripped off. So its a better value, because there is no risk. Even though it IS the same as reducing the price, it is called "transfering the risk" to the seller, instead of to you. It works.
5. Its a different kind of sale. All sales are good. Very often, an instant rebate is used on NEW items at their introductory price. IE: This item is $150 with a $50 instant rebate. After the rebate is gone, we put it on sale for $100.
Its all marketing, thats all. The above may not make sense to some of you. Good. Thats the idea. Many of you will smugly say that the above is stupid. Thats good, too. The more 'stupid' you think these sales tricks are, the more likely you are to fall for them. I'm not making it up either, it REALLY does work that way. But that is why they (we) do instant rebates: Because it works very very well, especially for quazi impulse purchases.
Remember boys and girls, you do NOT have to be evil to be in Marketing, but it helps.
I can assure you that I am not trolling, spreading FUD, or any of those things. This is a valid point that I've not seen brought up, and is the reason I do not include OpenOffice in Slackware (believe me, there are a lot of requests). I'd love to be shown how I'm wrong about this.
;) Starting reading at your suggestion, and Im even more confused.
Feel free to Google for OpenOffice's build requirements, and then follow the link to the gpc site.
I assumed your were wrong because what you were saying defies all logic, but the fact is, I was totally wrong. I mean, to use that license in OO would be stupid right?
Now that I have freely admitted that I had stuck my foot in my mouth, 95% of the people who NEED this/similar software us it in a commercial environment, so this is kinda dumb.
Is this being "fixed", as in removing GPC code and replacing it to make OO truly GPL? Im a bit shocked that the dev team has let the code mix this way, knowing that OO can't be used where it was designed to be used. Considering I was expecting to migrate everyone over to OO (linux and windows) the next cycle (summer) this puts a wrench in the works.
Since you're using OpenOffice at your company, you might be interested to know that you could be in violation of the gpc (general polygon clipping library) license. gpc, which is often mistaken for a GNU item since it starts with a 'g', is required to build OpenOffice. However (and I've never seen this mentioned or reported anywhere), it comes with a very restrictive 'non-commercial-use' license. Presumably anything linked with it (like OpenOffice) should also be considered for 'non-commercial-use' only as well, right?
You are so full of poo for trying to start a troll.
You should see some of the internal letters written by him during that period (retrieved by the FOIA). They are frightening at best.
;)
Oh, Im not saying have blind trust for sure, and I see potential pitfalls. I can't say who or shouldn't be in that position, but I tend to think people who were good at developing technology to violate your privacy would be better than say, Ned Flanders.
I am not ready to trust my privacy with much anyone, but if I have to, I would prefer someone who has been in the commercial world, and better if they have some history LIKE this.
To me, putting an inexperienced person without a full understand what they are up against is potentially more fretful, or at best ineffectual.
Yea, thats a good idea. Lets limit who can access Linux. Maybe we should have it where you have to get a license to make changes, that way we can keep them out. Or maybe we should just not let them have the source to begin with, so they can't change it. Or maybe, just not let anyone look at it, unless they sign a statement saying they won't release it to anyone else.
Congratulations, you just invented Windows.
I tend to think that the best person to do the job probably IS someone who has abused the shit out of the system.
Who is better at helping you make your house burgular proof, a novice, or an ex con?
This guy may be somewhat of an ex con, but he has to work in the public view, so I say give him a chance. He is going to know more tricks about privacy violations that the rest of us put together. Its better to have him working FOR us, than ON us.
But don't forget that Microsoft's job is to lock you into their platform. It sounds very neat that you don't care about politics (OSS vs. MS) but you seem to forget that MS does and will do what it can to lock users in.
No, not at all, it is the reason I am working so hard to change over to Linux. Politics aside, it would be a bad business decision for me to continue with Microsoft considering the direction they are going in.
So why would you care if the employees bitch about it?
Because employees matter. They are the main force behind profitability. Even if I didn't care what they think, it makes financial sense to keep them motivated. Any business that doesn't really care about their employees doesn't stay in business very long. They are more important than all our computers put together, no contest.
Some of you need to realize that most of us in the business world want the best software for the $
Really? Maybe that's why linux is gaining ground?
I agree. Its almost cost effective enough to switch on the desktop. Enough so that I am currently investing money to test and begin moving as many stations as I can to Linux. Its not ready to move everything TODAY (for me) but we expect to be 100% Microsoft free in 2 years.
Is a secure sytem even a priority for you?
Yes. Our servers are all 100% GNU/Linux. All our Windows boxes are behind a Linux firewall. All our very sensitive data is off the TCP/IP network if on a Windows box, and we are moving all sensitive data off windows boxes as fast as reasonably possible (hense the migration).
Can you get work done if your business data has been erased by an attacker? How much money can you make if you can't use your computers because they are busy with performing a DDoS attack?
All the systems that really REQUIRE windows, graphics stations, etc., do NOT have any sensitive customer data and the graphics are backed up to CD and one of our Linux servers, so a catastrophic loss would do minimal damage. We still keep a paper copy of every transaction as a backup to our computers (in addition to onsite and offsite backups).
Its not perfect, but (knock on wood) we have never had a virus, trojan, hacker get in our system. Like I said, we are migrating to Linux as rapidly as financially smart for US. We have never used Outlook, etc. or any Windows server products.
I like Linux and use it daily, but like most business decision makers, I am going to migrate at a pace that makes sense for my company. Until then, we have taken extraordinary steps to insure data security, and since we haven't had a single breach in the 9 years I have been there, I tend to think we are at least treading water.
It would be very difficult for anyone to tell me I am wrong when they have no idea what industry I am in, thus not understand my needs or the amount and type of information we store.
If the population of the US is so gullable that they buy this liberation crap, go right ahead, but don't bitch at the rest of us who can see through the incredibly transparant veil of spin-doctoring to see the truth that this liberation crap is just a bunch of bullshit cooked up at the last second to cover their asses.
I will gladly admit that liberation was a secondary reason at best. I support the primary reason: The asshole had lots of weapons, and not enough money, and there are lots of people who may not like him, but like us LESS and would gladly put up with him long enough to buy weapons. In that part of the world, the idea that "The enemy of my enemy is my friend" is very valid. I supported and voted for Ross BECAUSE we had not gone in and finished the job by liberating Iraq to begin with. I was a founding member of United We Stand, and had a multiline BBS very much dedicated to politics after our failure to free them. Many frieds were in Desert Storm. I am a vet. My father spent 21 years in, including in Korea and Vietname. Iraq has been on my mind a very long time, and I AM aware of the risks and rewards.
I am STILL glad we liberated the Iraqi's and my opinion is we need to do the unthinkable: Liberate others and educate their women. I say we SHOULD go and liberate other countries. It is preferable to do it without military force, but what ever it takes. Iran and N. Korea are good examples where military force would probably be the WORST way to liberate. Siria could go either way. Saudi Arabia is a sticky problem too. But free people generally don't support terrorism.
I don't appologize for thinking we need to liberate MORE countries rather than less. Liberation is almost never the primary reason, but it IS the lasting consequence that prevents further problems. For my money, liberation is a good thing, even if you don't agree with the primary reasons for going in. You disagree. Thats fine. Isn't it great we both live in free countries where its ok to debate this?
Any country that doesn't allow you and I to freely and openly discuss and disagree about this would be on my short list.