Keith McCaw, a billionaire whose family helped create a cellular-phone empire, was found dead in a hot tub in his lakeside Seattle mansion. He was 49.
You may have not appreciated the quality of service or the way McCaw communications muscled out the little guy, but there is no denying his impact upon the modern telecommunications industry. Truly an American icon, he will be missed.
THIS IS NOT A TROLL.
The spleen says the idea stinks
on
Tornado in a Can
·
· Score: 1
A. The qualifier ("troll", "insightful") should be seperate from the numeric value (+1, -1). So that you can do (+1, Troll) if you choose to.
B. Since the first thing someone does when the get moderator points is look for no-good shits to dump on, and due to the fact that we still get moderators who think AC's posting at 0 by default is not low enough when the normal reading threashold is 1, only allow upmoderation. This forces the cream to float to the top while not wasting energy on drowning trolls. Trolls and ACs are legion.
(I would have given you a +1, insightful asshole myself.)
Since there seems to be some funny moderation going on, I just wanted to clarify:
I REALLY DON"T LIKE BEING INTERRUPTED. A LOT
I feel this to the point that I routinely, seriously, consider removing the telephone because it allows people to intrude upon me at their will.
You smartacres out there can snort about typical nerds lost in concentration and borderline autism, I don't care.
I'm sure that I'm singing to the choir when I say that sometimes the level of marketing I'm barraged with seems to border on harassment.
(hmmmm... maybe I can cook up a group action lawsuit against the advertising industry...)
The local news ran a story about how cable companies are required to sell you individual channels if you so ask.
They told it like it was some great new consumer news.
Then they let slip that this is because of the 1996 Telecommunications reform act.
D'oh!
(I guess the technology finally caught up to where the compnaies felt it was actually feasable / profitable to actually comply with the law. That's life in these modern times. I hate you all.)
Excuse me, do you have my copy of "Catcher in the Rye"?
My tintinitus has been acting up something fierce lately, and I feel the need to re-read it again. I find it conforts me and clears my head.
Product placement == no ads to filter.
It's a (sorta) win-win situation.
No ads to annoy viewers.
Viewers cannot avoid being exposed to marketing.
I haven't heard any reviews in the media noting this, but I suspect that this was a deliberate experiment to find out whether this will solve the PVR problem.
Thanks for keeping me honest.
Yes, I am aware that although I do pay the cable company, the broadcasters get their money from their ads. (That still doesn't quite justify cable only channels having ads.) And that the ads subsidize the cost of programming.
Cable is a even murkier battleground for the media wars in that you have a mix of broadcasters (given a grant of the public airwaves by the FCC with the agreement that they will serve the public good) and pure cable-only channels.
I've been trying to make the point lately that both broadcast licenses and copyright are government grants of publicly owned resources given with the understanding that the PUBLIC gains some benefit in return.
Sorry guys, but that just has no value to me. Watching TV shows does have some value to me, such that I will pay for cable, and (maybe) watch ads. But the whole point of the broadcast system is to get people to buy stuff.
[important]
(Of course, the FCC grants licenses to broadcasters with the understanding that they will serve the public good. Hey, kind of like how copyright law gives someone a grant on a public domain with the view that it will serve the public good. And just like copyright, these companies have forgotten (or ignored) that they're being a special dispensation with the understanding that they will give something back in return.)
[/important]
Copyright is a government-granted monopoly, an EXCEPTION to the natural state.
Sit there and mull that over a bit.
Think about the implications.
By trying to contratually (EULA) or technologically (broken CD s) strip away our fair use rights granted under copyright law, media companies are stealing from the commons. (Ok, so this is the complimentary argument to their "TIVO users are thieves".)
I do agree that if consumers are ill-informed enough to buy into something, that they get what they pay for. If they start getting pissed that they can't listen to their Briteney'N'Sync in their imacs and returning them, maybe things will self-correct. If you sign that EULA, you agree to abide by its terms. You can sign away any rights you want to in a contract.
But make no mistake about it, copyright is an ARTIFICIAL state of affairs. Hell, look at what happened with "It's a Wonderful Life". It was of little value until it had been RETURNED to the public domain. Then the cable companies started using it for cheap holiday filler, and it became woven into our common culture. And this was something that the media companies (unknowingly) did.
Mickey Mouse would not be worth anywhere near so much if people everywhere didn't recognize him. Disney owes that value to Mickey being part of our common culture -- and copyright is a temporary grant of use THAT MUST BE RETURNED to the public domain.
standard Discordian disclaimer : parts of this are blatent lies, parts are true -- use your head and figure it out for yourself
Seems like we're looking in the wrong place.
If we're interested in finding an advanced starfaring civilization, can't we just look for strong signals that aren't coming from near a star?
As any twelve-year-old (or slashdot troll, but I repeat myself) can tell you, if something's funny once, it's 100x funnier the 100th time you hear it. This is a scientifically proven axiom of comedy.
Slashdot Mirror
but I really could have done without the mental image you just gave me! Worse than goatse. ugh.
Keith McCaw, a billionaire whose family helped create a cellular-phone empire, was found dead in a hot tub in his lakeside Seattle mansion. He was 49.
You may have not appreciated the quality of service or the way McCaw communications muscled out the little guy, but there is no denying his impact upon the modern telecommunications industry. Truly an American icon, he will be missed.
THIS IS NOT A TROLL.
Mr. Furious, your puny weapons cannot defeat Casanova Frankenstein !
Bobby built a bluebox and haxored the phone for free calls!
Then Greg stole all the credit.
Interesting. Why does a alledged techno-visionary like 'Greg' not have a website to share his widsom with the masses?!!
We've gone over this a million times.
A. The qualifier ("troll", "insightful") should be seperate from the numeric value (+1, -1). So that you can do (+1, Troll) if you choose to.
B. Since the first thing someone does when the get moderator points is look for no-good shits to dump on, and due to the fact that we still get moderators who think AC's posting at 0 by default is not low enough when the normal reading threashold is 1, only allow upmoderation. This forces the cream to float to the top while not wasting energy on drowning trolls. Trolls and ACs are legion.
(I would have given you a +1, insightful asshole myself.)
Since there seems to be some funny moderation going on, I just wanted to clarify :
I REALLY DON"T LIKE BEING INTERRUPTED.
A LOT
I feel this to the point that I routinely, seriously, consider removing the telephone because it allows people to intrude upon me at their will.
You smartacres out there can snort about typical nerds lost in concentration and borderline autism, I don't care.
I'm sure that I'm singing to the choir when I say that sometimes the level of marketing I'm barraged with seems to border on harassment.
(hmmmm... maybe I can cook up a group action lawsuit against the advertising industry...)
Your head. On a plate.
They told it like it was some great new consumer news.
Then they let slip that this is because of the 1996 Telecommunications reform act.
D'oh!
(I guess the technology finally caught up to where the compnaies felt it was actually feasable / profitable to actually comply with the law. That's life in these modern times. I hate you all.)
Excuse me, do you have my copy of "Catcher in the Rye"?
My tintinitus has been acting up something fierce lately, and I feel the need to re-read it again. I find it conforts me and clears my head.
It's a (sorta) win-win situation.
- No ads to annoy viewers.
- Viewers cannot avoid being exposed to marketing.
I haven't heard any reviews in the media noting this, but I suspect that this was a deliberate experiment to find out whether this will solve the PVR problem.Thanks for keeping me honest.
Yes, I am aware that although I do pay the cable company, the broadcasters get their money from their ads. (That still doesn't quite justify cable only channels having ads.) And that the ads subsidize the cost of programming.
Cable is a even murkier battleground for the media wars in that you have a mix of broadcasters (given a grant of the public airwaves by the FCC with the agreement that they will serve the public good) and pure cable-only channels.
I've been trying to make the point lately that both broadcast licenses and copyright are government grants of publicly owned resources given with the understanding that the PUBLIC gains some benefit in return.
A good consumer will WATCH MORE ADS !
Sorry guys, but that just has no value to me. Watching TV shows does have some value to me, such that I will pay for cable, and (maybe) watch ads. But the whole point of the broadcast system is to get people to buy stuff.
[important]
(Of course, the FCC grants licenses to broadcasters with the understanding that they will serve the public good. Hey, kind of like how copyright law gives someone a grant on a public domain with the view that it will serve the public good. And just like copyright, these companies have forgotten (or ignored) that they're being a special dispensation with the understanding that they will give something back in return.)
[/important]
What I don't understand is if I pay for cable programming, why the hell am I double-taxed by having to watch ads?!!!
They've been ripping me off for years, even before PVRs existed!
BASTARDS!
Hey, I'm only applying the same specious reasiong the media companies use to call me a pirate, a criminal and an ingrate!
Sit there and mull that over a bit.
Think about the implications.
By trying to contratually (EULA) or technologically (broken CD s) strip away our fair use rights granted under copyright law, media companies are stealing from the commons. (Ok, so this is the complimentary argument to their "TIVO users are thieves".)
I do agree that if consumers are ill-informed enough to buy into something, that they get what they pay for. If they start getting pissed that they can't listen to their Briteney'N'Sync in their imacs and returning them, maybe things will self-correct. If you sign that EULA, you agree to abide by its terms. You can sign away any rights you want to in a contract.
But make no mistake about it, copyright is an ARTIFICIAL state of affairs. Hell, look at what happened with "It's a Wonderful Life". It was of little value until it had been RETURNED to the public domain . Then the cable companies started using it for cheap holiday filler, and it became woven into our common culture. And this was something that the media companies (unknowingly) did.
Mickey Mouse would not be worth anywhere near so much if people everywhere didn't recognize him. Disney owes that value to Mickey being part of our common culture -- and copyright is a temporary grant of use THAT MUST BE RETURNED to the public domain.
standard Discordian disclaimer : parts of this are blatent lies, parts are true -- use your head and figure it out for yourself
Seems like we're looking in the wrong place. If we're interested in finding an advanced starfaring civilization, can't we just look for strong signals that aren't coming from near a star?
As any twelve-year-old (or slashdot troll, but I repeat myself) can tell you, if something's funny once, it's 100x funnier the 100th time you hear it. This is a scientifically proven axiom of comedy.
bumpersticker : Slashbot's dogma ran over my karma!
Actually, I envision a scene from "Airplane!" re-enacted on the original Enterprise's bridge:
"So, Wesley, do you like gladiator movies?"
I run SETI@home because I really want to meet Jodi Foster!
5. The "It's a trap!" signal
I'm sure you'll have the same opinion once I've mined the TIA database for information so I can take out several credit cards in your name.
thanks, you big, generous patriot, you!
Even the most powerful despot is helpless against the power of mockery!
Jesus H. Christ on a bicycle and his black bastard brother Bart! You can't even get the hoary old underpants gnomes schtick right!
The last step before 'profit' must always be '?????' indicating the fatal unexamined flaw in the business plan! That's the whole point of the joke!
It's all that damn blue smoke. It's a real bitch on the environment.
I think they need a similar tax on devices that function primarily upon mirrors and vapor too!