I clearly do not fully understand how anti-monopoly laws work, but aren't competing companies prohibited from doing exactly this? Instead of each company selling it's product and letting the market decide which is better, they're working together to restrain the industry and keeping products that might benefit the consumer off the market. Isn't that collusion? Isn't it illegal?
Someone please explain why it's not, I really would appreciate it (not kidding here, genuinely cuious).
Yes, but having the ability to use computers is a skill that is required for interaction and employment in the modern world. If your family can't afford a computer, and you go through your education without interaction with computers, you're going to be computer illiterate when you graduate. I used to do temp work from time to time to cover my rent and expenses, and it was easy to get work simply because I am very capable with computers. I didn't need to be able to program a word processor from scratch, I just needed to demostrate the ability to use a word processor.
Give people the access to use computers their entire lives, and computers will be something that are comfortable using for their personal or professional lives. It will make life easier for them, and for everyone who interacts with them. Be able to handle a computer is a basic school that the education system should be teaching, and having computers available, even just to play games on, is an intrigal part of that education.
Ha, that's funny. I didn't even realize it was a bug, I thought Firefox just chose a lousy small logo. I didn't understand why it wasn't their standard logo, but didn't realize it was a bug.
Ok, I admit it. I'm the person the RIAA should be blaming. You can all mark it down as my fault if you want. I'm the one who stopped buying CDs when P2P came along.
No, really.
I haven't bought a CD in 6 or 7 years. They're very expensive and file-sharing is free. Yes, I feel a little bit guilty about it, but there you have it.
I don't think that everyone is like me, but I really have to admit that I believe that file sharing is indeed costing the music industry money, just in the same way that CD bootlegging cost them money in the past. It's probably not a tremendous amount, I never really bought that many CDs to begin with, but it's certainly something.
So, for all of who argue that file sharing doesn't cost them money, keep in mind there are people like me. File sharins has cost them money from me, probably several hundred dollars.
In other news, famed actor Milt Longhorne has been signed up to be the spokesperson for the new Windows Longhorn operating system. Microsoft spokespeople said that Milt's popularity with the older generation would help to solidify Microsoft's place in the senior citizens' homes.
Broken business model seems to be the most popular phrase on Slashdot. It doesn't seem broken to me, tons of people use it and they're making buckets of money. It's more like a business model that you (and I) don't like. That's not broken, it's just annoying.
It absolutely is an economic problem, but I would personally prefer to keep the email system essentially free for all users rather than putting some sort of charge per email system in place. First, I don't think it's practical, but beyond that, do you really want to tell the poor rural school that they need to pay for every question their students email to a college professor? Do you want to let the sub-Saharan pen pal know that he can't write to his friend in Europe anymore?
Paying per email, even in small amounts, will cost us end users money. This is especially true in places where the value of 1/10 of 1 cent is still significant.
I'm pretty sure that killing jews and raping little girls was what their corporate creed was meant to prevent google from doing. I didn't come up with the phrase, they did, and if they seriously meant to use it to prevent their employees from engaging in a little holocaust on the side, then they have much bigger problems then my complaints about a context menu.
You can get around the disabled context menus, but it involves a little bit of sifting through the html. For example this is a page from 20,000 Leagues under the sea. Google set the background as the image you want to see, and placed a clear gif file above that, so when you click on view image, you just see the clear gif. Anyway, they didn't do anything too sneaky to hide the original image, it's just annoying.
I don't really see the utility of this besides the ability to search within a book. First of all, you don't get a plain text version, so I can't download it and read it offline. Secondly, most of these books are already covered by Project Guttenburg which does provide plain text versions that you can download to a PDA and read at your leisure.
Now, I readily admit I'm one of the few people who enjoys reading books off a PDA, but even I hate reading books on a regular computer screen. I don't think there's many people who will sit down and read long treatises this way. I could be wrong, but it seems unlikely.
Also, the system doesn't seem to let you jump quickly and easily within a book. There's no "Go to page X" ability, you can only move slowly forward and backward from a handful of starting positions.
This just doesn't seem very helpful (again, except if you're looking for a quote within a book and you want to search for it... this while be great for that).
"With settlements being the de facto standard response to criminal corporate behavoir."
Much like music piracy, this wasn't theft. It's not a legal issue per se, it's a civil issue. Hence why it was a lawsuit and not criminal investigation. Cash settlements don't usually end criminal investigations.
Fireball Island is the only game you'll ever want to play once you play it once. You move your little men up and down a volcanic island. Every once in a while the island will kick out a volcanic fireball which will literally roll across the board and burn unsuspecting players who will have to recover in a lava pit. Occasially the fireballs will knock out a bridge you're walking across and you'll be literally knocked into a river or ocean. Oh man what a game.
Ok, maybe it's not hat great, and maybe I haven't played it in ten years, but I sure remember it being great.
People who state that they don't want to see ads are traditionally considered to be the most profitable to advertise too. The logic has been that the person attempts to avoid being sold something because he/she KNOWS that they're too weak to say no to a good sell. The same logic, theoretically, holds true for people blocking web ads... hence the effort to get around pop-up and ad blockers.
Slashdot Mirror
I clearly do not fully understand how anti-monopoly laws work, but aren't competing companies prohibited from doing exactly this? Instead of each company selling it's product and letting the market decide which is better, they're working together to restrain the industry and keeping products that might benefit the consumer off the market. Isn't that collusion? Isn't it illegal?
Someone please explain why it's not, I really would appreciate it (not kidding here, genuinely cuious).
Yes, but having the ability to use computers is a skill that is required for interaction and employment in the modern world. If your family can't afford a computer, and you go through your education without interaction with computers, you're going to be computer illiterate when you graduate. I used to do temp work from time to time to cover my rent and expenses, and it was easy to get work simply because I am very capable with computers. I didn't need to be able to program a word processor from scratch, I just needed to demostrate the ability to use a word processor.
Give people the access to use computers their entire lives, and computers will be something that are comfortable using for their personal or professional lives. It will make life easier for them, and for everyone who interacts with them. Be able to handle a computer is a basic school that the education system should be teaching, and having computers available, even just to play games on, is an intrigal part of that education.
Ha, that's funny. I didn't even realize it was a bug, I thought Firefox just chose a lousy small logo. I didn't understand why it wasn't their standard logo, but didn't realize it was a bug.
I need to get a new OS.
We need to save three legged kittens from Google now? What, do they want to rip off the remaining legs? Are they going to come back to finish the job?
Now I truly fear the monstrosity that is Google.org.
They use a slightly different standard: 802.11pinko. And they're looking forward to the next standard, which hasn't yet been adopted, 802.11red.
I think the economics of your post is questionable. That is all.
Ok, I admit it. I'm the person the RIAA should be blaming. You can all mark it down as my fault if you want. I'm the one who stopped buying CDs when P2P came along.
No, really.
I haven't bought a CD in 6 or 7 years. They're very expensive and file-sharing is free. Yes, I feel a little bit guilty about it, but there you have it.
I don't think that everyone is like me, but I really have to admit that I believe that file sharing is indeed costing the music industry money, just in the same way that CD bootlegging cost them money in the past. It's probably not a tremendous amount, I never really bought that many CDs to begin with, but it's certainly something.
So, for all of who argue that file sharing doesn't cost them money, keep in mind there are people like me. File sharins has cost them money from me, probably several hundred dollars.
Now let's hope they don't bash down my door.
Yeah, but has anyone ever heard of your band? Would they have heard of your band if you'd signed the contract?
Take the contract, get famous, then worry about rights.
In other news, famed actor Milt Longhorne has been signed up to be the spokesperson for the new Windows Longhorn operating system. Microsoft spokespeople said that Milt's popularity with the older generation would help to solidify Microsoft's place in the senior citizens' homes.
Broken business model seems to be the most popular phrase on Slashdot. It doesn't seem broken to me, tons of people use it and they're making buckets of money. It's more like a business model that you (and I) don't like. That's not broken, it's just annoying.
It absolutely is an economic problem, but I would personally prefer to keep the email system essentially free for all users rather than putting some sort of charge per email system in place. First, I don't think it's practical, but beyond that, do you really want to tell the poor rural school that they need to pay for every question their students email to a college professor? Do you want to let the sub-Saharan pen pal know that he can't write to his friend in Europe anymore?
Paying per email, even in small amounts, will cost us end users money. This is especially true in places where the value of 1/10 of 1 cent is still significant.
I'm pretty sure that killing jews and raping little girls was what their corporate creed was meant to prevent google from doing. I didn't come up with the phrase, they did, and if they seriously meant to use it to prevent their employees from engaging in a little holocaust on the side, then they have much bigger problems then my complaints about a context menu.
You can get around the disabled context menus, but it involves a little bit of sifting through the html. For example this is a page from 20,000 Leagues under the sea. Google set the background as the image you want to see, and placed a clear gif file above that, so when you click on view image, you just see the clear gif. Anyway, they didn't do anything too sneaky to hide the original image, it's just annoying.
What happened to "don't be evil"?
I don't really see the utility of this besides the ability to search within a book. First of all, you don't get a plain text version, so I can't download it and read it offline. Secondly, most of these books are already covered by Project Guttenburg which does provide plain text versions that you can download to a PDA and read at your leisure.
Now, I readily admit I'm one of the few people who enjoys reading books off a PDA, but even I hate reading books on a regular computer screen. I don't think there's many people who will sit down and read long treatises this way. I could be wrong, but it seems unlikely.
Also, the system doesn't seem to let you jump quickly and easily within a book. There's no "Go to page X" ability, you can only move slowly forward and backward from a handful of starting positions.
This just doesn't seem very helpful (again, except if you're looking for a quote within a book and you want to search for it... this while be great for that).
For people complaining about the "rental" aspect of the movie, do you find Napster to Go more or less acceptable than Netflix?
Does anyone know of a graph that shows broswer usage over the last few years and actually has up to date numbers? Just wondering.
"With settlements being the de facto standard response to criminal corporate behavoir."
Much like music piracy, this wasn't theft. It's not a legal issue per se, it's a civil issue. Hence why it was a lawsuit and not criminal investigation. Cash settlements don't usually end criminal investigations.
Fireball Island is the only game you'll ever want to play once you play it once. You move your little men up and down a volcanic island. Every once in a while the island will kick out a volcanic fireball which will literally roll across the board and burn unsuspecting players who will have to recover in a lava pit. Occasially the fireballs will knock out a bridge you're walking across and you'll be literally knocked into a river or ocean. Oh man what a game.
Ok, maybe it's not hat great, and maybe I haven't played it in ten years, but I sure remember it being great.
Staples?
Glad I only ever drive in North America (it's the best America in town!)
"Paying bounties for certain features"... wouldn't be marketing.
This seems kind of silly, but haven't space ships done this thousands and thousands of times?
Or return it to the store. 7 days should still be within the return period. Where did you buy it?
People who state that they don't want to see ads are traditionally considered to be the most profitable to advertise too. The logic has been that the person attempts to avoid being sold something because he/she KNOWS that they're too weak to say no to a good sell. The same logic, theoretically, holds true for people blocking web ads... hence the effort to get around pop-up and ad blockers.
The being said, I love my pop-up and ad blocking.
I've had great experiences with the TMobile customer service department as well as their phone service in general. I highly recommend them.
Maybe it's because I can hear.