The Attorney General (Alberto Gonzalez) serves as an appointee of the President. You've got that much right. However, the Attorneys General that were replaced are appointed by the US Attorney General whose office is charged with serving the interests of the Judicial branch of the US government, not the Executive branch. While the US AG may serve at the pleasure of the President, he is not expected be beholden to the partisan interests of the President. The US AG is supposed to facilitate the enforcement of that the Legislative branch's checks (i.e. laws), not to place attorneys who kowtow to the will of one party or the other.
Oh please, save me your diatribe about ideological assumptions. I'm completely aware of my ideological assumptions, and hatred of gay people isn't one of them.
You're missing my very simple point, which is not that you are homophobic but that ideology gives meaning to the language you use. If being gay were on some level not bad in North American culture, "gay" would no longer hold force as pejorative.
Your attempt to decouple the two is absurd. "Gay" as a pejorative reinforces the idea that being a male homosexual is bad. You seem, though, determined to deny what is obvious. I suppose that's your choice. Regarding the idea that "people would always have to consider the etymology of a word for anything to make sense," you might consider Nietzsche's Genealogy of Morals. Meaning is always transmitted through historical structures in language, whether you acknowledge it or not.
The negative meaning of the word "gay" depends on an underlying ideological assumption that homosexuality is negative. In common American English, it hinges upon the stereotype of gay males as effeminate and so "wimpy," "ineffective," "uninspiring," and "frivolous."
Every time someone uses "gay" as a way of dismissing or derogating something, an ideological link between male homosexuality and reprehensibility is exploited and reinforced. This ideological linkage is more obvious when, for example, someone calls an obviously straight male a "fag." That's how most degrading language works. Think about words like "cocksucker," "cunt," "asshole," etc. None of those are literal. They gather their force from deep cultural beliefs about what is good and bad.
Naming something "gay" to indicate it sucks depends, in American English, on cultural homophobia and, in my opinion, is the sign of a shallow mind.
Seriously, Gaim was a terrible name. Nothing against homosexuals, but Gaim -> Gay IM?
Your comment betrays antipathy toward homosexuality because you bring it up as a reason for a "terrible name." Regardless of your patronizing "tolerance," the complaint you imagine is meaningless because if you're hearing "Gaim" as "gaym" then should also hear "gamers" as "gaymers." I'm betting dollars to donuts you would never advance the argument that gamers is a "terrible" word, whatever you say about having "Nothing against homosexuals."
Ecto 2 has serious flaws and the developer suppresses this information on his developer page. Quoting my own blog entry regarding the problem:
If after posting a blog entry (with or without Ecto) you edit the code for a blog entry in a text editor, say BBEdit, and then load that entry into Ecto, Ecto wipes out all advanced tagging, including but not limited to CSS tags, XML markup, and HTML styling. Ecto will not notify you that it has made these changes. So if, for example, you use Ecto to do a minor edit of a blog entry, all of your specialized markup will silently but surely disappear.
Ecto 2 is not for anyone who uses even the least bit of custom CSS and/or markup.
You're quoting very selectively and distorting the original context. In particular, the OP makes reference to Troff. From the OP:
As any Word(tm) user knows, page layout and text formatting should be done Visually. I don't code in assembler any more. And I shouldn't have to write text-formatting codes. Troff was obsolete years ago! CSS is just Troff on steroids.
Troff, my garrulous interlocutor, is for text-formatting.
You are correct that tables don't style text, but the point the OP is making is about text-formatting aka style. This is what my original and subsequent posts address.
And, yes, HTML tables and CSS can and should work together. I have authored web pages that say as much.
No I'm not. You're confusing my comment with one that does. When I'm talking about selectors within div classes I'm talking about style. I understand tables are useful for certain things, and my point is that the OP is suggesting everyone stick with tables. I gave an example, confined to style, where CSS was the clear choice.
CSS is such a pain in the butt we should all go back to using tables. I really think it's easier.
As I was learning CSS, I used to think this, too. In some ways it's true: using tables to get your layout done is easy because the form is apparent from the table itself. CSS obscures that to some extent with floats and margins.
But some things are possible in CSS that just cannot be done in HTML tables. For example, I can say something like "Unvisited ypertext links contained in a "navigation" div should be underlined and white text on black background. Everywhere else, unvisited hypertext links should be underlined blue text on a white background." That is, I can use selectors to target appearance (and form) based on class definitions. This is powerful stuff.
When I want to add a new div class, I can adjust for readability and emphasis across the entire web site by adjusting the CSS. Try it some time. You'll never use HTML to style your text again.
Who knows? Perhaps our need for a spam filtering engine could breed innovation in the AI community?
Such an approach may generate capable and powerful natural language parsers. Rock on. But as a solution to spam it really is a case of "naive (computer) scientist."
The most direct approach to stopping spam is breaking these botnets and the most direct real-world approach to breaking these botnets is cleaning up the mess that Microsoft has made of their OS.
And I'm not flamebaiting because if it were Linux or Mac OS botnets sending out this spam, the most direct approach would be to clean those operating systems, too. The most effective solution is one that responds to the reality, what scientists mean when they say "the natural world." In computing, the natural world presents us with the undeniable fact that the computers out of which spam botnets are built are compromised Windows machines. Fix Windows (largely done in XP) and kill Windows pre-XP.
Maybe Bill Gates's charitable trust should purchase free upgrades for anyone with MS Windows pre-XP. Please?
Yeah, yeah, lame to reply to my own post. BUT, I have a blog entry that depends upon a YouTube entry and now that link is broken, except . . . Daily Show videos are still available on http://video.google.com/.
I know that. What I want to know is how Google "flopped" when YouTube complied with a reasonable request
The reason so many are claiming Google has made a mistake in purchasing YouTube is the presumption that the primary value of YouTube is the illegal distribution of copyrighted content. Many people, and many/.ers, assume user-created content is valueless and cannot be the center of a viable online business model, despite the success of sites that depend on user contributions,/. itself being a prime example.
Google has not misstepped. The only thing that has misstepped is some/.ers' senses that with the end of an easy means to violate copyright using YouTube so ends the commercial value of YouTube as a whole.
If it's $200 every couple of years for glasses, and laser eye surgery only costs $500, doesn't have to be redone, and is risk free, then I think may people will opt for that instead of glasses.
One of the things that people with perfect vision (or vision that is not absolutely abysmal like mine) do not really get is that nearsightedness can also be an advantage. For example, when I am not wearing corrective lenses I can read microprint. This may seem trivial, but it definitely came in handy when I was upgrading the hard drive on my (now ex-) girlfriend's 12" powerbook. At some point I came across a ribbon cable that was keyed, and not until I got WAY up close and personal without my contacts could I see where to place a very tiny pin to unlatch the plastic key. The dimensions of the plug/socket were about 1/16" square if I remember correctly.
Now, I know I could have used magnifying lenses which engineers use for precision work, but that would miss the point that nearsightedness is sometimes a benefit. I generally avoid corrective surgery if there are non-invasive means of correcting the problem. For me, impaired vision in the mornings is lovely. I like being able to see my lovers up close and in focus. I would not be able to do this if my vision had been surgically "corrected."
It can say "yes, iPods work via USB and triggers iTunes, and will update and function accordingly" because they control the hardware and the software.
Apple controls no part of Dell, Toshiba, HP, Sony hardware and no part of Microsoft Windows. Apple only controls iTunes and the iPod which is part of the software and part of the hardware. Apple is better at producing hardware and software even if it does not control all aspects of the interface for that hardware and software.
This is the precise sentiment that Bush has used to justify and excuse incompetents in his administration. Bush is not doing a "good job." He has involved the world's only superpower in a war of attrition with a nearly-ubiquitous but unpinnable enemy. He has driven the value of the dollar down in order to decrease the price of exports and his policies on everything from health care to energy policy are a shambles.
Bush is not an "ordinary Joe, put in a position he probably shouldn't be in." He sought elected office. His family and pedigree has groomed him for that office, and the man does not lead the country except to line the pockets of his cronies.
The reality is different - crime rates aren't much different than elsewhere
I'm not sure if you are comparing like to like. It's been a long time since I took courses outside my areas of specialty (~ 20 years), but when I was in school (college) theories of social density and its correlation to behavioral pathology were widely accepted. Much available data supported the correlation and many studies were published.
The general idea is that when you increase the number of people per square unit of surface area "deviant" behavior among humans increases. Rape and murder is part of this pathology, but so are things like indecent exposure, assault, swearing, etc. I don't have any judgments about such behavior. I'm just saying that crime rates, if we are to believe studies that link social density to behavioral pathology, do differ depending on where you live. Crime in a rural area (low social density) will be less than crime in an urban area. This means that a country like Australia (an entire continent) will have less crime per capita than, say, Los Angeles.
I googled for a bit using "social density" and "crime" but couldn't come up with anything with that "gotta click" feel. It might be because such theories have been debunked (unlikely), are no longer in vogue (likely), or something else (very likely).
Here's the front end of one article that you need JSTOR access to read. Maybe others (or me later) can follow up with better links showing one way or the other. I actually should be doing other research at the moment. : )
OK, I'm not going to bother to respond to you after this because you're very rude and, apparently, are seriously aggrieved you've been modded troll. You might want to take two steps back and think how you are "fulfilling the prophecy" as the saying goes.
You are not correct about not being able to move files from the shuffle (or any iPod) to a different PC. You need to access the invisible directory on the iPod whose path is/Volumes/[your iPod]/iPod_Control/Music/
Once you are in there, you will see a number of directories with names like "F01", "F02", etc. Inside of those directories are the files you are interested in. You can move those files--AS I'VE SAID TWICE BEFORE--either by hand or using a third-party utility (e.g. Senuti). If you move them by hand they will have obscured names (which is not so much an issue for the shuffle as there are not so many files), but once you drop them into iTunes, iTunes will give them the proper names on the PC.
Finally, your hostility and defensiveness are blinding you to what I'm saying: you are wrong about being able to move files to the iPod or from the iPod. It is possible and Apple doesn't prevent it. At all. Period.
Now excuse me while I do something more rewarding than providing you web-based tech support.
I can select whatever songs I want and add them to the shuffle.
So what are you on about in your original post? That you can't move songs from your iPod to a PC? As I said in my post before this one, iTunes does not facilitate moving files from your iPod to your PC but it is trivial to do, either by hand or by using a third-party application.
Regarding "sucking on steve jobs' iRod," I'm really not sure what pointing out that you are a TROLL has to do with performing fellatio on the CEO of Apple. Maybe I'm missing something over here.
I am proud, btw, to have you on my freaks list. Good show!
Look, I'm not trying to goad you and after reading your original post, I think we may have a slight misunderstanding.
I went to the web doc you indicate but it's and FAQ for the iPod shuffle. I don't have much experience with the shuffle, but my understanding is that it was designed not to allow choice in the matter of which songs are synched to it.::shrugs::.
A full(er)-fledged iPod on the other hand is quite different. If you decline to allow iTunes to automatically sync a new/strange iPod, then you will be free to put any songs in your iTunes Library into the iPod. It's that simple.
Any misunderstanding on my part may have come from the fact you may have been talking about getting songs from an iPod to the PC. This limitation (unidirectionality of files) is common knowledge but it is actually not enforced by iTunes. ITunes rather de-facilitates (to euphemize "security by obscurity") the movement of files from an iPod to a PC, but it is actually fairly easy to do so by hand or using any of a number of third-party softwares.
Finally, about my ad hominem: you are troll. You're spreading misinformation regarding the operation of iTunes and iPods in order to get responses. When someone calls you on what you're doing as well as correcting your information, look how you respond. I said it once and I'll say it again: YOU ARE A TROLL (or at least you have been in this thread).
(If Microsoft is smart, you will be able to give fresh trials over and over. Then the kids who haven't bought the music need to repeatedly go to the kid who has, in order to get their new time-limited free copies.)
You can't be serious. This scenario does not acknowledge the present-day realities of media and the Internet.
If I had a Zune and some kid gave me a trial copy of a song and I liked it, once that song expired I would not go back to the first kid: I would go online and obtain my own copy, legitimately or otherwise. There is nothing for your scenario to reinforce in a world where media can be obtained from multiple sources. If, on the other hand, these files could only be obtained through Microsoft's music store, something of what you're imagining would happen among very naive users (i.e. teenagers). Adults would purchase their own copy immediately or wait until it became available elsewhere.
Finally, your scenario also ignores the fact that there are people who distribute songs on the Internet through other means. For example, if I wanted to share songs with a group of people I know, I would simply upload them to my webserver and point folks at the URL (password protected, of course).
Maybe it's good I don't work for Microsoft because I fail to see how sharing of audio advertisements over WiFi is going to sell either devices or media files.
If I plug my iPod into someone elses PC and try to access the library, I will get a friendly iTunes prompt asking if I want to attach my iPod to that PC
iTunes will ask you if you want to use iTunes to automatically sync the strange iPod you connected. You decline and now you are free to move any and all songs from the PC (including Apple DRM'ed ones) on the iPod.
Slashdot Mirror
The Attorney General (Alberto Gonzalez) serves as an appointee of the President. You've got that much right. However, the Attorneys General that were replaced are appointed by the US Attorney General whose office is charged with serving the interests of the Judicial branch of the US government, not the Executive branch. While the US AG may serve at the pleasure of the President, he is not expected be beholden to the partisan interests of the President. The US AG is supposed to facilitate the enforcement of that the Legislative branch's checks (i.e. laws), not to place attorneys who kowtow to the will of one party or the other.
I am an American.
Oh please, save me your diatribe about ideological assumptions. I'm completely aware of my ideological assumptions, and hatred of gay people isn't one of them.
You're missing my very simple point, which is not that you are homophobic but that ideology gives meaning to the language you use. If being gay were on some level not bad in North American culture, "gay" would no longer hold force as pejorative.
Your attempt to decouple the two is absurd. "Gay" as a pejorative reinforces the idea that being a male homosexual is bad. You seem, though, determined to deny what is obvious. I suppose that's your choice. Regarding the idea that "people would always have to consider the etymology of a word for anything to make sense," you might consider Nietzsche's Genealogy of Morals. Meaning is always transmitted through historical structures in language, whether you acknowledge it or not.
As I've said elsewhere
Seriously, Gaim was a terrible name. Nothing against homosexuals, but Gaim -> Gay IM?
Your comment betrays antipathy toward homosexuality because you bring it up as a reason for a "terrible name." Regardless of your patronizing "tolerance," the complaint you imagine is meaningless because if you're hearing "Gaim" as "gaym" then should also hear "gamers" as "gaymers." I'm betting dollars to donuts you would never advance the argument that gamers is a "terrible" word, whatever you say about having "Nothing against homosexuals."
The first time I tried the dashboard I could not believe anyone thought this was either useful *or* cool; I haven't touched it since.
I'm an academic writer and I find the F12 call to bring up the calendar and the dictionary + thesaurus a godsend. As with anything, YMMV.
Ecto 2 has serious flaws and the developer suppresses this information on his developer page. Quoting my own blog entry regarding the problem:
Ecto 2 is not for anyone who uses even the least bit of custom CSS and/or markup.
Johnnie Wilcox
aka mistersquid
Mea culpa. The OP is talking about layout, not "formatting" which I mistakenly took to be "styling."
I have confused the argument from the word "go."
TheGreek: 1, mistersquid: 0
You're quoting very selectively and distorting the original context. In particular, the OP makes reference to Troff. From the OP:
Troff, my garrulous interlocutor, is for text-formatting.
You are correct that tables don't style text, but the point the OP is making is about text-formatting aka style. This is what my original and subsequent posts address.
And, yes, HTML tables and CSS can and should work together. I have authored web pages that say as much.
You're confusing "style" with "layout," sir.
No I'm not. You're confusing my comment with one that does. When I'm talking about selectors within div classes I'm talking about style. I understand tables are useful for certain things, and my point is that the OP is suggesting everyone stick with tables. I gave an example, confined to style, where CSS was the clear choice.
CSS is such a pain in the butt we should all go back to using tables. I really think it's easier.
As I was learning CSS, I used to think this, too. In some ways it's true: using tables to get your layout done is easy because the form is apparent from the table itself. CSS obscures that to some extent with floats and margins.
But some things are possible in CSS that just cannot be done in HTML tables. For example, I can say something like "Unvisited ypertext links contained in a "navigation" div should be underlined and white text on black background. Everywhere else, unvisited hypertext links should be underlined blue text on a white background." That is, I can use selectors to target appearance (and form) based on class definitions. This is powerful stuff.
When I want to add a new div class, I can adjust for readability and emphasis across the entire web site by adjusting the CSS. Try it some time. You'll never use HTML to style your text again.
Who knows? Perhaps our need for a spam filtering engine could breed innovation in the AI community?
Such an approach may generate capable and powerful natural language parsers. Rock on. But as a solution to spam it really is a case of "naive (computer) scientist."
The most direct approach to stopping spam is breaking these botnets and the most direct real-world approach to breaking these botnets is cleaning up the mess that Microsoft has made of their OS.
And I'm not flamebaiting because if it were Linux or Mac OS botnets sending out this spam, the most direct approach would be to clean those operating systems, too. The most effective solution is one that responds to the reality, what scientists mean when they say "the natural world." In computing, the natural world presents us with the undeniable fact that the computers out of which spam botnets are built are compromised Windows machines. Fix Windows (largely done in XP) and kill Windows pre-XP.
Maybe Bill Gates's charitable trust should purchase free upgrades for anyone with MS Windows pre-XP. Please?
Yeah, yeah, lame to reply to my own post. BUT, I have a blog entry that depends upon a YouTube entry and now that link is broken, except . . . Daily Show videos are still available on http://video.google.com/.
=)
I know that. What I want to know is how Google "flopped" when YouTube complied with a reasonable request
The reason so many are claiming Google has made a mistake in purchasing YouTube is the presumption that the primary value of YouTube is the illegal distribution of copyrighted content. Many people, and many /.ers, assume user-created content is valueless and cannot be the center of a viable online business model, despite the success of sites that depend on user contributions, /. itself being a prime example.
Google has not misstepped. The only thing that has misstepped is some /.ers' senses that with the end of an easy means to violate copyright using YouTube so ends the commercial value of YouTube as a whole.
It needs to be cheaper than Amazon's used books are or I'll just buy a real book.
This is exactly what those who control distribution want, to hamstring digital media so they will not prevail.
If it's $200 every couple of years for glasses, and laser eye surgery only costs $500, doesn't have to be redone, and is risk free, then I think may people will opt for that instead of glasses.
One of the things that people with perfect vision (or vision that is not absolutely abysmal like mine) do not really get is that nearsightedness can also be an advantage. For example, when I am not wearing corrective lenses I can read microprint. This may seem trivial, but it definitely came in handy when I was upgrading the hard drive on my (now ex-) girlfriend's 12" powerbook. At some point I came across a ribbon cable that was keyed, and not until I got WAY up close and personal without my contacts could I see where to place a very tiny pin to unlatch the plastic key. The dimensions of the plug/socket were about 1/16" square if I remember correctly.
Now, I know I could have used magnifying lenses which engineers use for precision work, but that would miss the point that nearsightedness is sometimes a benefit. I generally avoid corrective surgery if there are non-invasive means of correcting the problem. For me, impaired vision in the mornings is lovely. I like being able to see my lovers up close and in focus. I would not be able to do this if my vision had been surgically "corrected."
It can say "yes, iPods work via USB and triggers iTunes, and will update and function accordingly" because they control the hardware and the software.
Apple controls no part of Dell, Toshiba, HP, Sony hardware and no part of Microsoft Windows. Apple only controls iTunes and the iPod which is part of the software and part of the hardware. Apple is better at producing hardware and software even if it does not control all aspects of the interface for that hardware and software.
So.. what.. Microsoft can't sell anything anymore?
That would be a nice start.
and by and large I think he's done a good job.
This is the precise sentiment that Bush has used to justify and excuse incompetents in his administration. Bush is not doing a "good job." He has involved the world's only superpower in a war of attrition with a nearly-ubiquitous but unpinnable enemy. He has driven the value of the dollar down in order to decrease the price of exports and his policies on everything from health care to energy policy are a shambles.
Bush is not an "ordinary Joe, put in a position he probably shouldn't be in." He sought elected office. His family and pedigree has groomed him for that office, and the man does not lead the country except to line the pockets of his cronies.
The reality is different - crime rates aren't much different than elsewhere
I'm not sure if you are comparing like to like. It's been a long time since I took courses outside my areas of specialty (~ 20 years), but when I was in school (college) theories of social density and its correlation to behavioral pathology were widely accepted. Much available data supported the correlation and many studies were published.
The general idea is that when you increase the number of people per square unit of surface area "deviant" behavior among humans increases. Rape and murder is part of this pathology, but so are things like indecent exposure, assault, swearing, etc. I don't have any judgments about such behavior. I'm just saying that crime rates, if we are to believe studies that link social density to behavioral pathology, do differ depending on where you live. Crime in a rural area (low social density) will be less than crime in an urban area. This means that a country like Australia (an entire continent) will have less crime per capita than, say, Los Angeles.
I googled for a bit using "social density" and "crime" but couldn't come up with anything with that "gotta click" feel. It might be because such theories have been debunked (unlikely), are no longer in vogue (likely), or something else (very likely).
Here's the front end of one article that you need JSTOR access to read. Maybe others (or me later) can follow up with better links showing one way or the other. I actually should be doing other research at the moment. : )
That wasn't my last post, but this one probably will be.
This article had instructions for PC users.
OK, I'm not going to bother to respond to you after this because you're very rude and, apparently, are seriously aggrieved you've been modded troll. You might want to take two steps back and think how you are "fulfilling the prophecy" as the saying goes.
You are not correct about not being able to move files from the shuffle (or any iPod) to a different PC. You need to access the invisible directory on the iPod whose path is /Volumes/[your iPod]/iPod_Control/Music/
Once you are in there, you will see a number of directories with names like "F01", "F02", etc. Inside of those directories are the files you are interested in. You can move those files--AS I'VE SAID TWICE BEFORE--either by hand or using a third-party utility (e.g. Senuti). If you move them by hand they will have obscured names (which is not so much an issue for the shuffle as there are not so many files), but once you drop them into iTunes, iTunes will give them the proper names on the PC.
Finally, your hostility and defensiveness are blinding you to what I'm saying: you are wrong about being able to move files to the iPod or from the iPod. It is possible and Apple doesn't prevent it. At all. Period.
Now excuse me while I do something more rewarding than providing you web-based tech support.
I can select whatever songs I want and add them to the shuffle.
So what are you on about in your original post? That you can't move songs from your iPod to a PC? As I said in my post before this one, iTunes does not facilitate moving files from your iPod to your PC but it is trivial to do, either by hand or by using a third-party application.
Regarding "sucking on steve jobs' iRod," I'm really not sure what pointing out that you are a TROLL has to do with performing fellatio on the CEO of Apple. Maybe I'm missing something over here.
I am proud, btw, to have you on my freaks list. Good show!
Look, I'm not trying to goad you and after reading your original post, I think we may have a slight misunderstanding.
I went to the web doc you indicate but it's and FAQ for the iPod shuffle. I don't have much experience with the shuffle, but my understanding is that it was designed not to allow choice in the matter of which songs are synched to it. ::shrugs::.
A full(er)-fledged iPod on the other hand is quite different. If you decline to allow iTunes to automatically sync a new/strange iPod, then you will be free to put any songs in your iTunes Library into the iPod. It's that simple.
Any misunderstanding on my part may have come from the fact you may have been talking about getting songs from an iPod to the PC. This limitation (unidirectionality of files) is common knowledge but it is actually not enforced by iTunes. ITunes rather de-facilitates (to euphemize "security by obscurity") the movement of files from an iPod to a PC, but it is actually fairly easy to do so by hand or using any of a number of third-party softwares.
Finally, about my ad hominem: you are troll. You're spreading misinformation regarding the operation of iTunes and iPods in order to get responses. When someone calls you on what you're doing as well as correcting your information, look how you respond. I said it once and I'll say it again: YOU ARE A TROLL (or at least you have been in this thread).
Good day to you.
(If Microsoft is smart, you will be able to give fresh trials over and over. Then the kids who haven't bought the music need to repeatedly go to the kid who has, in order to get their new time-limited free copies.)
You can't be serious. This scenario does not acknowledge the present-day realities of media and the Internet.
If I had a Zune and some kid gave me a trial copy of a song and I liked it, once that song expired I would not go back to the first kid: I would go online and obtain my own copy, legitimately or otherwise. There is nothing for your scenario to reinforce in a world where media can be obtained from multiple sources. If, on the other hand, these files could only be obtained through Microsoft's music store, something of what you're imagining would happen among very naive users (i.e. teenagers). Adults would purchase their own copy immediately or wait until it became available elsewhere.
Finally, your scenario also ignores the fact that there are people who distribute songs on the Internet through other means. For example, if I wanted to share songs with a group of people I know, I would simply upload them to my webserver and point folks at the URL (password protected, of course).
Maybe it's good I don't work for Microsoft because I fail to see how sharing of audio advertisements over WiFi is going to sell either devices or media files.
If I plug my iPod into someone elses PC and try to access the library, I will get a friendly iTunes prompt asking if I want to attach my iPod to that PC
iTunes will ask you if you want to use iTunes to automatically sync the strange iPod you connected. You decline and now you are free to move any and all songs from the PC (including Apple DRM'ed ones) on the iPod.
Thanks for playing!