If a company's being bad, you can get them in more shit by having the CC company deal with them than trying to deal with that company's CS dept (which, in this case, I'm sure would be useless).
troll me if you want (Karma be damned, I'll be moderating again soon enough:), but here goes:
From the article:
Other free software licenses not considered fully GPL compatible by the Free Software Foundation include the Apache license, the Mozilla Public License, the IBM Public License and the Sun Public License.
( I believe they also rejected Apple's Darwin licence recently)
Just who is the FSF to dictate the importance of a licence by its 'GPL' compatibility?
A licence is a license; don't like? Don't use it! - simple, isn't it?
I mean, I'm not gonna go out and not use something that doesn't have a 'GPL-compatible' license just because the FSF have some big presence and just say so.
I'll decide what I want to use, and if the license's term don't bode well with me, then I'll look for something else.
[rant mode off]
Reports indicate that the phrase "All you atom are belong to us" was heard just before the blinding flash occured...
in addition to what's been said numerous times, one other major problem I had working tech support was the total lack of tool available to us.
For example: while working for a computer products distributor, we rarely had the actual specs sheets of new products available to us to answer customers' questions. Licensing issues were also hell for me (especially MS's licensing crap)
As tech support for a laptop company, we only had a handful of the actual machines on the floor, so we mostly had to resort to pretty pictures and technotes from the tech database to resolve problems, and the old workstations only running OS/2 weren't very helpful!
to explain to them why I'm unsubscribing to their service because of this kind of crap?
I'm not good with words, and I've seen some people's letters to these kind of companies really put them in their place, much better than I ever could, so any pointer to any good letters would be appreciated:)
Actually, no, in some parts of the world TV broadcasts are free, like radio. You do pay for cable, but the theory is that this is because otherwise you couldn't pick up those stations at all.
Put out an antenna strong enough and you can get the channels just fine - no need for cable.
So TV could be just like radio - free with ads - that I wouldn't mind.
I just don't like paying to see commercials (that's why I don't go out to see movies anymore, I just rent them now).
TV subscription is the biggest legal scam after car insurance
I mean, radio has a lot of commercials, and we don't pay for it!
Sure, cable is different because there's an 'infrastructure', but instead of us paying for it, it should be the TV networks; afterall, if they want the population to see their shows, they should be the ones that pay for that infrastructure so that it reaches as much of the population as they want.
It's kinda hard to know what to do about this -
with TV when the ads become too annoying I just turn the TV off and go read a book or something.
But a computer game - where I've already paid for it...
Errr, you've already paid for watching TV too...
Quite frankly, I don't even know why we have to pay to get TV channels at all! Afterall, we're paying to see commercials, with some bits of shows in between
The cable carriers should charge the TV networks to carry their signals if they want the population to see their shows; this works for radio, why hasn't TV done this?
Slashdot Mirror
.
Oh yeah! Let's double the debt!!!!
'Reports indicate the phase "All your atom are belong to us" was heard shortly before the blinding flash occured'
Of couse, Sheila Copps did resign (after much pressure), only to be re-elected by the same people that elected her in the first place - go figure!
If a company's being bad, you can get them in more shit by having the CC company deal with them than trying to deal with that company's CS dept (which, in this case, I'm sure would be useless).
Most CC companies don't accept this kind of bad behavior from companies and will deal with them promptly.
After all, they're making money off of my personal information, regardless of whether I want them to sell it or not...
"They'll get the last laugh in 24 months when MS forces software vendors to release games for that system (XBox) only."
From the article:
( I believe they also rejected Apple's Darwin licence recently)
Just who is the FSF to dictate the importance of a licence by its 'GPL' compatibility?
A licence is a license; don't like? Don't use it! - simple, isn't it?
I mean, I'm not gonna go out and not use something that doesn't have a 'GPL-compatible' license just because the FSF have some big presence and just say so.
I'll decide what I want to use, and if the license's term don't bode well with me, then I'll look for something else.
[rant mode off]
Reports indicate that the phrase "All you atom are belong to us" was heard just before the blinding flash occured...
And noJudge Shopping either!
All these express something. The fact that the program/piano/furniture provides functionality seems irrelevant to me.
For example: while working for a computer products distributor, we rarely had the actual specs sheets of new products available to us to answer customers' questions. Licensing issues were also hell for me (especially MS's licensing crap)
As tech support for a laptop company, we only had a handful of the actual machines on the floor, so we mostly had to resort to pretty pictures and technotes from the tech database to resolve problems, and the old workstations only running OS/2 weren't very helpful!
I'll admin I didn't read the patent - but '3D IRC'?
Kinda like 3d text in banner ads? There you go, prior art :)
I'm not good with words, and I've seen some people's letters to these kind of companies really put them in their place, much better than I ever could, so any pointer to any good letters would be appreciated :)
Just because a TV ad has a 1-800 number included, does that mean people will immediately call that number? Of course not.
Until they realize that banner ads will only work just like TV/radio ads do, they're gonna keep failing at trying to making it what it can't be
And I guess my paying the cable company for access to that TV content (however crappy that content is) doesn't entitle me to skip the commercials...
'nuff said
Much less use any rebates of theirs
No wonder IOmega is a fuckedcompany
Put out an antenna strong enough and you can get the channels just fine - no need for cable.
So TV could be just like radio - free with ads - that I wouldn't mind.
I just don't like paying to see commercials (that's why I don't go out to see movies anymore, I just rent them now).
I mean, radio has a lot of commercials, and we don't pay for it!
Sure, cable is different because there's an 'infrastructure', but instead of us paying for it, it should be the TV networks; afterall, if they want the population to see their shows, they should be the ones that pay for that infrastructure so that it reaches as much of the population as they want.
This has worked for radio.
Errr, you've already paid for watching TV too...
Quite frankly, I don't even know why we have to pay to get TV channels at all! Afterall, we're paying to see commercials, with some bits of shows in between
The cable carriers should charge the TV networks to carry their signals if they want the population to see their shows; this works for radio, why hasn't TV done this?
I mean, we're forced to have ads in the games, why should we have to pay to get ads??
Problem solved :)