Of course law enforcement agencies want to search for clues in e-mail and I would be very angry, as an American, if AOL, Earthlink, or other ISPs were anything less than cooperative with reasonable requests.
Choose your battles wisely. An investigation into the worst act of terrorism in our nation's history is not the same thing as Carnivore systematically, but without specific purpose, examining every e-mail that goes through an ISP.
If you are transmitting data of a sensitive nature, encrypt it. If you have sent unencrypted e-mail indicating your involvement in criminal activity, then you should be arrested -- for stupidity!
This is a testament to the fact that chess is a poor challenge to the intellect.
That statement is a testament to the fact that eating oatmeal is probably a real challenge to your intellect.
I suppose you are going to tell me that Bobby Fischer's IQ of 180 and his chess playing abilities are just sheer coincidence. Any time that you think that chess is not challenging to a person's intellect, I suggest that you play a couple of games with a master or grandmaster.
I suggest changing to a game like 'go' where it is very hard to simulate with a computer.
When computers become fast enough, it will be possible to write a brute-force Go program just as has been done for chess. And when that happens, you will not see me saying that go is not intellectually challenging because a computer could do it.
How would you feel if you played online chess and discovered that you had been beated 10 times in a row by a chess program he had written? Is that still skill on skill?
How would you feel if you played a first person shooter and your opponent beat you ten times in a row using an "aim bot" he wrote himself? How would you feel if you got into a boxing match and your opponent beat you unconscious with a club he had made on his own lathe? The idea is to pit opponents against each other on a level playing field. And that means playing the game as it was designed to be played.
There are games out there that wrote this into their business model- the ability to outright purchase, from the game company directly, items and status.
That's why I, and many others, don't play those games.
Cheaters can always rationalize what they do. "I work a full time job, so I don't have enough time to play the game." "I was injured, so I had to take steroids to make up for lost training time." "I'm 20 pounds lighter than my opponent so it's only fair for me to have buckshot in my boxing glove." It's all still cheating.
How would you feel if you were playing online chess and discovered that the opponent that beat you 10 straight games had done so with a chess program he purchased? I know that I would feel cheated because I was playing against him to test my skill against his. I don't care if he bought the chess program on "the free market."
The idea of a game is to pit players against one another and let the best player win, not to sell the victory to the player with the most disposable income and least scruples.
1. The monopolistic aspect of this potential merger. There is already a paucity of competition for broadband in the U.S. with most people probably only having a single choice. Having a company as huge as AOLTW controlling a majority of the cable modem business in the U.S. would likely result in service degradation and rising rates. Just look at Microsoft to see what a monopoly does for/to consumers.
2. Because AOL is a proprietary service aimed at the Internet neophyte, many people are concerned that the only choice for broadband would be a high-speed pipeline through which AOL could pump its ceaseless banner ads and spam. In addition to the content issue, the proprietary nature of the service would make it impossible for people to run FTP servers, web servers, mail servers, etc. (contrary to popular belief, customers may run servers under the terms of many cable franchises).
3. AOL has a long history of censoring users. While this might make some religious zealots and guilt-ridden absentee parents happy, it is a chilling prospect to those who wish to engage in adult discussions on anything from breast cancer to S&M clubs.
But if a jock posts to a geek site that you don't need so much computers, he gets modded up. Strange world.
When I was in high school, they wanted me to go out for the football team. I refused because it would take time away from my using the computer (this was 22-23 years ago so we didn't all have PCs in our homes). Now I program embedded systems. So I'm anything but a jock.
This is more like a jock coming to a football game and telling his teammates that they don't each need seven footballs.
How the fuck would YOU know that I don't need seven computers?
Because I have some common sense. That's why I would also feel confident telling you that you don't need 13 can openers, 6 vacuum cleaners, or 19 VCRs.
I should kill you
If you aren't man enough to build a computer desk, you sure aren't man enough to kill me.;-)
Either buy something at an office furniture store or build something from wood, formica, etc. How are we supposed to know what you want? We don't know your taste (if applicable), the size of the room, the size of the computers, where your doors and windows are, etc.
Another thing: You don't need seven computers. Get rid of at least three of them, buy drive drawers or set up some kind of multi-booting software.
Re:People's time is worth something.
on
eBay Beats DMCA
·
· Score: 2
Henderson was being very arrogant, acting like he's above the system
He is "above the system" when the system is just an arbitrary procedure put in place by a private entity (ebay). It is not like ebay is an extension of the judicial branch of the government. What if ebay decided that all complaints must be submitted in Urdu, written on parchment, and be accompanied by a DNA sample of the complainant?
His sole responsibility was to show that the person is selling bootleg videos, not that he can can follow ebay's requested procedures.
Thirty minutes writing a letter is not that long to spend if possibly millions of dollars of lost sales (or whatever the RIAA is claiming it is now) are at stake. Certainly less time than a lawsuit.
If he feels that ebay's procedures are an undue burden on him and on thousands of other individuals and firms, he is right, and within his rights, to try to overturn those procedures in court. Perhaps he feels that the procedures discourage people from filing just complaints. Maybe he believes the procedures to be arbitrary and capricious. Some people press lawsuits because they believe that a company is acting unjustly, not just for personal gain.
So a worker wanting to keep what he has earned is "greedy", while you wanting to forcibly take his earnings is not.
This may come as a huge shock to you, but I don't take anyone's taxes. I pay taxes. The only difference between you and me is that I view it as my duty as an American to pay my fair share.
Using 2000 acres out of 15 million in ANWR for access to potentially huge oil reserves
According to the DOE, the best estimate for the "huge" oil reserves is 10.3 billion barrels. Sounds like a lot, doesn't it? Well, it's 5% of the total recoverable oil in the lower 48 states. Big deal. And when would we see significant production from it? 13 years from now if we gave the go-ahead today. So we could reap benefits from this in the year 2014.
sounds good to me, especially since previous drilling in Alaska has shown it can be done with minimal environmental impact.
Like the Exxon Valdez has shown? It's not like we can just hit "rewind" if the oil company optimists are wrong. Rather than sucking every last drop of oil out of the Earth, how about going for greater fuel economy? Why do we need to run pipelines through pristine wilderness areas so that soccer moms can drive around in Ford Behemoth SUVs? Let the gas prices rise and people will start driving cars that make sense.
And the DOJ did not drop the Microsoft case
I never said that they did. I said "the decision to let mega-monopoly Microsoft remain intact." Which part of that did you not comprehend?
You should try incorporating facts and logic into your arguments sometime, although I realize this can be difficult if you're a liberal.
It must be even tougher for you since you appear to be functionally illiterate (see Microsoft comments) and apparently knew nothing of the DOE report that gave the facts on the Bush-proposed ANWR oil drilling.
I make enough that some of my income is taxed at 36% -- next to the highest bracket.
Would you say 75-100K is a lot of cash?
Cash? Yes. Investment? No.
When they talk about tax breaks that help the top 2-3%, it may surprise you to find out who is in there.
I may well be. I know that I will get a big chunk of money back as a result of the Bush tax cut. But what is good for me personally in the short term is not necessarily what is good for the country in the long term.
It doesn't take any moral fortitude to say "I want to pay less tax." I like to think that I have enough to say that I'm paying a fair amount.
I suspect you can count the really good government programs on one hand
The government does more with tax dollars than just charity. Tax dollars pay for everything from NASA to the Peace Corps to the military. Much of the money that goes to those programs then "trickles down" to the private sector, with contracts going to many private sector firms that employ countless U.S. citizens. Cutting back on the government's paycheck (by cutting taxes) does more than put the screws to welfare recipients.
Right-wing nuts believe in honesty in business, and that's what this case amounts to.
That's admirable, but left-wing nuts like me believe that consumers have rights. We believe that "fair use" is a consumer right. If I buy a Charley Pride CD (or a music CD), I have a right to record it in MP3 format to listen on my computer and my Riovolt. If I just want to pop it into my CD-ROM drive and listen to it, I have a right to do so. I don't think that a record company saying "we have made it impossible for you to exercise your fair use rights" is acceptable.
The arts are different than any other consumer product. If, for example, the music of The Goo Goo Dolls speaks to you, you cannot just flick a mental switch and decide to switch to The Backstreet Boys if the record company starts copy-protecting Goo Goo Dolls CDs. If you want to buy the latest Madonna album, it's not like you can choose to purchase it from the record company that you like best. You have to buy it from AOL/Time Warner. Period. Because of this exclusivity, record companies need to be controlled like what they are -- monopolies.
Back to the question of truth in advertising, if it does not follow the standards for a Compact Disc, why are they calling it a Compact Disc and using the Philips/Sony CD trademark?
You know, instead of saying all that you could just have the word 'loser' tattoed[sic] on your forehead.
Nope. I'm a winner. I have a good job, the respect of my colleagues, good friends, and sleep well at night. The reason that you hear the same argument over and over is because it is based in fact. Republicans, in general, are greedy, self-centered, give-me-a-tax-cut-and-to-hell-with-everyone-else types. They don't care about the "greater good." Just look at the efforts to drill for oil in Alaskan wilderness areas and the decision to let mega-monopoly Microsoft remain intact.
So go ahead and resort to your ad-hominem attacks. I don't take anyone who posts as "Anonymous Coward" too seriously.
The judge could aware punitive damages of hundreds of thousands of dollars. This is over and above the compensatory damages (which could include not only the original purchase price, but legal fees, lost wages while in court, etc.)
Besides, some lawsuits happen because someone feels that there is an injustice in the world, not out of some sense of personal greed. If you don't understand this, ask some of your Democratic friends to explain it to you.
(Not to right-wing moderators: I have 50 Karma points, so I can afford to lose two or three for being honest here.)
Re:People's time is worth something.
on
eBay Beats DMCA
·
· Score: 2
I don't see how requiring someone to prove that their copyright is being violated before an auction is shut down is being unreasonable. Shutting down auctions (or websites) on the mere unsubstatiated accusation of infringement seems much more unreasonable.
Clue Train! All aboard!
If someone is offering copies of a never-released-on-DVD documentary for sale on DVD, it doesn't take Perry Mason to figure out that the copies are bootlegs.
Except Ebay doesn't know you
Who cares if the complainant is actually the infringed copyright holder? He informed ebay of the infringement and asked them to stop the auction. All that they need to do is figure out that the items are bootlegs and stop it -- and that's pretty darned easy to do according to other reports I have read on this matter.
Not to mention that there is a third party in this (the seller) who is being accused.
Since ebay is not a court of law, it is unlikely that they will be able to enter a "guilty" verdict on the accused's criminal record. So please stop pretending that a commercial site must be held to the same standards of evidence as a criminal or civil court.
People's time is worth something.
on
eBay Beats DMCA
·
· Score: 2
It takes time and money to craft a letter asserting your legal position -- whether you do it yourself or pay an attorney. It is unreasonable for ebay to require that you do additional work to comply with some internal procedure that they have developed.
It would be like your neighbor telling you that that he would not remove his car from your driveway until you filled out that "Car Removal Request Form" that he developed.
this really does provide a nice platform for Linux telephony
"Linux telephony"? Am I in a Dilbert cartoon about buzzword hell or what? It's a network appliance with a voice modem and a telephone handset. Big friggin' deal. I can just envision conversations like the one below:
Son: Hi Mom. I'm calling you on a Linux-based telephone.
Mom: A what?
Son: A Linux-based telephone. It's a phone with Linux in it. I just started penguin-dial, clicked on your name, and it dialed the phone for me.
Mom: Oh, like my speed dial buttons...
Son: No, this has your name on the screen.
Mom: But I write the names on the labels next to the speed dial buttons.
Son: This is different. It's like a laptop computer and it was only $99.
Mom: But we bought you a laptop computer before you went to college. What happened to that? If a $99 one was all you needed, why did your father and I spend $1500?
Son: I still have the laptop. This one is really slow and has a small screen. Plus, it does not run on batteries so you have to keep it plugged in. So this can't replace the laptop.
Mom: So if you already have a better computer and your phone worked fine, why did you need that new $100 thing you are using?
Son: Because it runs Linux.
Mom: You keep saying that. What's Linux?
Son: It's like Windows only way better. It's free.
Mom: So you spent $100 for a computer phone to run a free computer program that gives you speed dial?
Son: You don't understand. It does much more than that.
Mom: Like what?
Son: It has a web browser and word processor and calculator and all kinds of other stuff.
Mom: But that laptop has all of that, doesn't it.
Son: Yeah, but it uses Windows and Windows sucks.
Mom: Then why did you have us get you a computer with Windows?
Son: Because all of the programs that I need to run for school are on Windows. But it sucks. It's not stable and crashes a lot.
Mom: So this new "thing" doesn't crash?
Son: It does, but that's because it has a beta version of Linux on it. Once I have a non-beta version of Linux, it should be more stable than my laptop.
Mom: So now you will use this new thing and the laptop we spent all of that money on will gather dust?
Son: No Mom. You just don't understand. Anyway, that's not what I called about. Could you and Dad send me another $100? I need it for books and clothes and stuff.
Some controllers and devices are incredibly picky about the quality of the termination, refusing to work reliably with anything but the best quality active termination.
Well, obviously buying the cheap stuff gets you in trouble. But I would think you wouldn't buy SCSI at all if you're picky about the price..
Unfortunately, the quality of the termination is seldom something that can be judged by price or even appearance. I had one $30 active terminator that did not work worth a damn with some Adaptec SCSI controllers while some no-name $15 POS worked fine. Go figure.
I've never quite understood that part. If you can't design your own products without looking at a competitors product, you're FSCKd. What I'm saying here is that if you're one product cycle behind, there is no way that you'll be able to compeat.
It's not that simple. A complex product, whether a CPU or a 3D accelerator, can do some things well and others not so well. If you can take everything that your competitor did well and incorporate it into your next chip, you have a tremendous advantage. Conversely, if you can analyze your competitor's product for weaknesses, you can create benchmarks that rely heavily on the feature in which your competitors are weak.
Also, product cycles from competitors are often not timed to be in sync with one another. You may be half way through yours while your competitor has just released a new product.
Look at nVidia's acquisition of 3dfx. nVidia's chips were considered superior to the 3dfx Voodoo chips, yet they still bought 3dfx. It was not for the name (they aren't using that) or manufacturing capability. They wanted the technology. By merging the best features and implementations from the 3dfx chips and their own, they can come out with a superior product.
And this is the kicker: it automatically updated itself over the internet. Seamlessly.
If only it were so easy... The browser was updated at great cost by software engineers at QNX and only the delivery of the update was automatic. I know that you are aware of this, but it makes a point. The updates to the browser would only occur so long as it was a profitable venture for QNX. If they decide that the market isn't there, no more updates. When that happens, you will be stuck with something that renders fewer and fewer web pages correctly.
The only sensible Internet appliance would be one based on an open source OS and browser. Anything else is going to end up an orphan.
So, you think that I am "totally wrong"? Well, prepare to get smacked down hard...
Netpliance i-opener ads appeared in the AARP (American Association of Retired Persons) Modern Maturity magazine. There's a real way to attract "Generation Y" consumers: Advertise in a magazine for retired people over 50.
According the C/Net:
With the debut of eVilla, Sony has become the latest company to market a Web-browsing appliance to the roughly half of American households that don't own a computer.
Think of all those Gen-Y people that don't have a computer in the house. There's a big demographic for you.
They went on to say:
Internet appliance makers such as Netpliance that have targeted Net neophytes have found the going tough
"Neophyte" means "beginner." That hardly sounds like the tech-savvy Generation Y crowd you claim that they were targeting.
What does Compaq's own web page say about their Compaq iPAQ Home Internet Appliance?
The Compaq iPAQ Home Internet Appliance makes getting to your e-mail and the Internet as easy as 1-2-3. With a simple setup, no software to load and built-in help, no computer experience is necessary.
That's right! The perfect device for all of you computer-literate Generation Y kids that have trouble "getting to your e-mail and the Internet."
Before proclaiming me "wrong" again, I suggest that you do some research. Internet Appliances are a market segment with which I am extremely familiar. I know a lot about where ads were placed, the target demographics, the manufacturing costs, and the technology.
By the way, you claim the failure of Internet appliances was because "they were crap, plain and simple." Then tell us what they did wrong and how you would have made a successful Internet appliance. Don't go off on any flights of fancy with 21" LCD monitors, wireless networking, and gigahertz processors for $99. Tell us, in realistic terms, how you could make an Internet appliance that would be a commercial success.
Slashdot Mirror
..I don't think Osama used America Online...
Maybe he did. That could explain why he hates America.
Of course law enforcement agencies want to search for clues in e-mail and I would be very angry, as an American, if AOL, Earthlink, or other ISPs were anything less than cooperative with reasonable requests.
Choose your battles wisely. An investigation into the worst act of terrorism in our nation's history is not the same thing as Carnivore systematically, but without specific purpose, examining every e-mail that goes through an ISP.
If you are transmitting data of a sensitive nature, encrypt it. If you have sent unencrypted e-mail indicating your involvement in criminal activity, then you should be arrested -- for stupidity!
If Fry's really wanted the egghead.com customer database, why didn't they just buy it from some 15 year old Russian hacker?
This is a testament to the fact that chess is a poor challenge to the intellect.
That statement is a testament to the fact that eating oatmeal is probably a real challenge to your intellect.
I suppose you are going to tell me that Bobby Fischer's IQ of 180 and his chess playing abilities are just sheer coincidence. Any time that you think that chess is not challenging to a person's intellect, I suggest that you play a couple of games with a master or grandmaster.
I suggest changing to a game like 'go' where it is very hard to simulate with a computer.
When computers become fast enough, it will be possible to write a brute-force Go program just as has been done for chess. And when that happens, you will not see me saying that go is not intellectually challenging because a computer could do it.
How would you feel if you played online chess and discovered that you had been beated 10 times in a row by a chess program he had written? Is that still skill on skill?
How would you feel if you played a first person shooter and your opponent beat you ten times in a row using an "aim bot" he wrote himself? How would you feel if you got into a boxing match and your opponent beat you unconscious with a club he had made on his own lathe? The idea is to pit opponents against each other on a level playing field. And that means playing the game as it was designed to be played.
There are games out there that wrote this into their business model- the ability to outright purchase, from the game company directly, items and status.
That's why I, and many others, don't play those games.
Cheaters can always rationalize what they do. "I work a full time job, so I don't have enough time to play the game." "I was injured, so I had to take steroids to make up for lost training time." "I'm 20 pounds lighter than my opponent so it's only fair for me to have buckshot in my boxing glove." It's all still cheating.
How would you feel if you were playing online chess and discovered that the opponent that beat you 10 straight games had done so with a chess program he purchased? I know that I would feel cheated because I was playing against him to test my skill against his. I don't care if he bought the chess program on "the free market."
The idea of a game is to pit players against one another and let the best player win, not to sell the victory to the player with the most disposable income and least scruples.
What concerns me are three basic issues:
1. The monopolistic aspect of this potential merger. There is already a paucity of competition for broadband in the U.S. with most people probably only having a single choice. Having a company as huge as AOLTW controlling a majority of the cable modem business in the U.S. would likely result in service degradation and rising rates. Just look at Microsoft to see what a monopoly does for/to consumers.
2. Because AOL is a proprietary service aimed at the Internet neophyte, many people are concerned that the only choice for broadband would be a high-speed pipeline through which AOL could pump its ceaseless banner ads and spam. In addition to the content issue, the proprietary nature of the service would make it impossible for people to run FTP servers, web servers, mail servers, etc. (contrary to popular belief, customers may run servers under the terms of many cable franchises).
3. AOL has a long history of censoring users. While this might make some religious zealots and guilt-ridden absentee parents happy, it is a chilling prospect to those who wish to engage in adult discussions on anything from breast cancer to S&M clubs.
Just wait until April 20th, 2002...
18th birthday coming up that soon?
But if a jock posts to a geek site that you don't need so much computers, he gets modded up. Strange world.
When I was in high school, they wanted me to go out for the football team. I refused because it would take time away from my using the computer (this was 22-23 years ago so we didn't all have PCs in our homes). Now I program embedded systems. So I'm anything but a jock.
This is more like a jock coming to a football game and telling his teammates that they don't each need seven footballs.
How the fuck would YOU know that I don't need seven computers?
;-)
Because I have some common sense. That's why I would also feel confident telling you that you don't need 13 can openers, 6 vacuum cleaners, or 19 VCRs.
I should kill you
If you aren't man enough to build a computer desk, you sure aren't man enough to kill me.
Either buy something at an office furniture store or build something from wood, formica, etc. How are we supposed to know what you want? We don't know your taste (if applicable), the size of the room, the size of the computers, where your doors and windows are, etc.
Another thing: You don't need seven computers. Get rid of at least three of them, buy drive drawers or set up some kind of multi-booting software.
Henderson was being very arrogant, acting like he's above the system
He is "above the system" when the system is just an arbitrary procedure put in place by a private entity (ebay). It is not like ebay is an extension of the judicial branch of the government. What if ebay decided that all complaints must be submitted in Urdu, written on parchment, and be accompanied by a DNA sample of the complainant?
His sole responsibility was to show that the person is selling bootleg videos, not that he can can follow ebay's requested procedures.
Thirty minutes writing a letter is not that long to spend if possibly millions of dollars of lost sales (or whatever the RIAA is claiming it is now) are at stake. Certainly less time than a lawsuit.
If he feels that ebay's procedures are an undue burden on him and on thousands of other individuals and firms, he is right, and within his rights, to try to overturn those procedures in court. Perhaps he feels that the procedures discourage people from filing just complaints. Maybe he believes the procedures to be arbitrary and capricious. Some people press lawsuits because they believe that a company is acting unjustly, not just for personal gain.
Serial killers depersonalize their victims before they kill them.
Kind of funny coming from someone who posted as Anonymous Coward, isn't it?
So a worker wanting to keep what he has earned is "greedy", while you wanting to forcibly take his earnings is not.
This may come as a huge shock to you, but I don't take anyone's taxes. I pay taxes. The only difference between you and me is that I view it as my duty as an American to pay my fair share.
Using 2000 acres out of 15 million in ANWR for access to potentially huge oil reserves
According to the DOE, the best estimate for the "huge" oil reserves is 10.3 billion barrels. Sounds like a lot, doesn't it? Well, it's 5% of the total recoverable oil in the lower 48 states. Big deal. And when would we see significant production from it? 13 years from now if we gave the go-ahead today. So we could reap benefits from this in the year 2014.
sounds good to me, especially since previous drilling in Alaska has shown it can be done with minimal environmental impact.
Like the Exxon Valdez has shown? It's not like we can just hit "rewind" if the oil company optimists are wrong. Rather than sucking every last drop of oil out of the Earth, how about going for greater fuel economy? Why do we need to run pipelines through pristine wilderness areas so that soccer moms can drive around in Ford Behemoth SUVs? Let the gas prices rise and people will start driving cars that make sense.
And the DOJ did not drop the Microsoft case
I never said that they did. I said "the decision to let mega-monopoly Microsoft remain intact." Which part of that did you not comprehend?
You should try incorporating facts and logic into your arguments sometime, although I realize this can be difficult if you're a liberal.
It must be even tougher for you since you appear to be functionally illiterate (see Microsoft comments) and apparently knew nothing of the DOE report that gave the facts on the Bush-proposed ANWR oil drilling.
You probably don't make enough to care yet.
I make enough that some of my income is taxed at 36% -- next to the highest bracket.
Would you say 75-100K is a lot of cash?
Cash? Yes. Investment? No.
When they talk about tax breaks that help the top 2-3%, it may surprise you to find out who is in there.
I may well be. I know that I will get a big chunk of money back as a result of the Bush tax cut. But what is good for me personally in the short term is not necessarily what is good for the country in the long term.
It doesn't take any moral fortitude to say "I want to pay less tax." I like to think that I have enough to say that I'm paying a fair amount.
I suspect you can count the really good government programs on one hand
The government does more with tax dollars than just charity. Tax dollars pay for everything from NASA to the Peace Corps to the military. Much of the money that goes to those programs then "trickles down" to the private sector, with contracts going to many private sector firms that employ countless U.S. citizens. Cutting back on the government's paycheck (by cutting taxes) does more than put the screws to welfare recipients.
Right-wing nuts believe in honesty in business, and that's what this case amounts to.
That's admirable, but left-wing nuts like me believe that consumers have rights. We believe that "fair use" is a consumer right. If I buy a Charley Pride CD (or a music CD), I have a right to record it in MP3 format to listen on my computer and my Riovolt. If I just want to pop it into my CD-ROM drive and listen to it, I have a right to do so. I don't think that a record company saying "we have made it impossible for you to exercise your fair use rights" is acceptable.
The arts are different than any other consumer product. If, for example, the music of The Goo Goo Dolls speaks to you, you cannot just flick a mental switch and decide to switch to The Backstreet Boys if the record company starts copy-protecting Goo Goo Dolls CDs. If you want to buy the latest Madonna album, it's not like you can choose to purchase it from the record company that you like best. You have to buy it from AOL/Time Warner. Period. Because of this exclusivity, record companies need to be controlled like what they are -- monopolies.
Back to the question of truth in advertising, if it does not follow the standards for a Compact Disc, why are they calling it a Compact Disc and using the Philips/Sony CD trademark?
You know, instead of saying all that you could just have the word 'loser' tattoed[sic] on your forehead.
Nope. I'm a winner. I have a good job, the respect of my colleagues, good friends, and sleep well at night. The reason that you hear the same argument over and over is because it is based in fact. Republicans, in general, are greedy, self-centered, give-me-a-tax-cut-and-to-hell-with-everyone-else types. They don't care about the "greater good." Just look at the efforts to drill for oil in Alaskan wilderness areas and the decision to let mega-monopoly Microsoft remain intact.
So go ahead and resort to your ad-hominem attacks. I don't take anyone who posts as "Anonymous Coward" too seriously.
The judge could aware punitive damages of hundreds of thousands of dollars. This is over and above the compensatory damages (which could include not only the original purchase price, but legal fees, lost wages while in court, etc.)
Besides, some lawsuits happen because someone feels that there is an injustice in the world, not out of some sense of personal greed. If you don't understand this, ask some of your Democratic friends to explain it to you.
(Not to right-wing moderators: I have 50 Karma points, so I can afford to lose two or three for being honest here.)
I don't see how requiring someone to prove that their copyright is being violated before an auction is shut down is being unreasonable. Shutting down auctions (or websites) on the mere unsubstatiated accusation of infringement seems much more unreasonable.
Clue Train! All aboard!
If someone is offering copies of a never-released-on-DVD documentary for sale on DVD, it doesn't take Perry Mason to figure out that the copies are bootlegs.
Except Ebay doesn't know you
Who cares if the complainant is actually the infringed copyright holder? He informed ebay of the infringement and asked them to stop the auction. All that they need to do is figure out that the items are bootlegs and stop it -- and that's pretty darned easy to do according to other reports I have read on this matter.
Not to mention that there is a third party in this (the seller) who is being accused.
Since ebay is not a court of law, it is unlikely that they will be able to enter a "guilty" verdict on the accused's criminal record. So please stop pretending that a commercial site must be held to the same standards of evidence as a criminal or civil court.
It takes time and money to craft a letter asserting your legal position -- whether you do it yourself or pay an attorney. It is unreasonable for ebay to require that you do additional work to comply with some internal procedure that they have developed.
It would be like your neighbor telling you that that he would not remove his car from your driveway until you filled out that "Car Removal Request Form" that he developed.
this really does provide a nice platform for Linux telephony
"Linux telephony"? Am I in a Dilbert cartoon about buzzword hell or what? It's a network appliance with a voice modem and a telephone handset. Big friggin' deal. I can just envision conversations like the one below:
Son: Hi Mom. I'm calling you on a Linux-based telephone.
Mom: A what?
Son: A Linux-based telephone. It's a phone with Linux in it. I just started penguin-dial, clicked on your name, and it dialed the phone for me.
Mom: Oh, like my speed dial buttons...
Son: No, this has your name on the screen.
Mom: But I write the names on the labels next to the speed dial buttons.
Son: This is different. It's like a laptop computer and it was only $99.
Mom: But we bought you a laptop computer before you went to college. What happened to that? If a $99 one was all you needed, why did your father and I spend $1500?
Son: I still have the laptop. This one is really slow and has a small screen. Plus, it does not run on batteries so you have to keep it plugged in. So this can't replace the laptop.
Mom: So if you already have a better computer and your phone worked fine, why did you need that new $100 thing you are using?
Son: Because it runs Linux.
Mom: You keep saying that. What's Linux?
Son: It's like Windows only way better. It's free.
Mom: So you spent $100 for a computer phone to run a free computer program that gives you speed dial?
Son: You don't understand. It does much more than that.
Mom: Like what?
Son: It has a web browser and word processor and calculator and all kinds of other stuff.
Mom: But that laptop has all of that, doesn't it.
Son: Yeah, but it uses Windows and Windows sucks.
Mom: Then why did you have us get you a computer with Windows?
Son: Because all of the programs that I need to run for school are on Windows. But it sucks. It's not stable and crashes a lot.
Mom: So this new "thing" doesn't crash?
Son: It does, but that's because it has a beta version of Linux on it. Once I have a non-beta version of Linux, it should be more stable than my laptop.
Mom: So now you will use this new thing and the laptop we spent all of that money on will gather dust?
Son: No Mom. You just don't understand. Anyway, that's not what I called about. Could you and Dad send me another $100? I need it for books and clothes and stuff.
Unfortunately, the quality of the termination is seldom something that can be judged by price or even appearance. I had one $30 active terminator that did not work worth a damn with some Adaptec SCSI controllers while some no-name $15 POS worked fine. Go figure.
I've never quite understood that part. If you can't design your own products without looking at a competitors product, you're FSCKd. What I'm saying here is that if you're one product cycle behind, there is no way that you'll be able to compeat.
It's not that simple. A complex product, whether a CPU or a 3D accelerator, can do some things well and others not so well. If you can take everything that your competitor did well and incorporate it into your next chip, you have a tremendous advantage. Conversely, if you can analyze your competitor's product for weaknesses, you can create benchmarks that rely heavily on the feature in which your competitors are weak.
Also, product cycles from competitors are often not timed to be in sync with one another. You may be half way through yours while your competitor has just released a new product.
Look at nVidia's acquisition of 3dfx. nVidia's chips were considered superior to the 3dfx Voodoo chips, yet they still bought 3dfx. It was not for the name (they aren't using that) or manufacturing capability. They wanted the technology. By merging the best features and implementations from the 3dfx chips and their own, they can come out with a superior product.
Thanks for the reply. I did have one issue:
And this is the kicker: it automatically updated itself over the internet. Seamlessly.
If only it were so easy... The browser was updated at great cost by software engineers at QNX and only the delivery of the update was automatic. I know that you are aware of this, but it makes a point. The updates to the browser would only occur so long as it was a profitable venture for QNX. If they decide that the market isn't there, no more updates. When that happens, you will be stuck with something that renders fewer and fewer web pages correctly.
The only sensible Internet appliance would be one based on an open source OS and browser. Anything else is going to end up an orphan.
So, you think that I am "totally wrong"? Well, prepare to get smacked down hard...
Netpliance i-opener ads appeared in the AARP (American Association of Retired Persons) Modern Maturity magazine. There's a real way to attract "Generation Y" consumers: Advertise in a magazine for retired people over 50.
According the C/Net:
With the debut of eVilla, Sony has become the latest company to market a Web-browsing appliance to the roughly half of American households that don't own a computer.
Think of all those Gen-Y people that don't have a computer in the house. There's a big demographic for you.
They went on to say:
Internet appliance makers such as Netpliance that have targeted Net neophytes have found the going tough
"Neophyte" means "beginner." That hardly sounds like the tech-savvy Generation Y crowd you claim that they were targeting.
What does Compaq's own web page say about their Compaq iPAQ Home Internet Appliance?
The Compaq iPAQ Home Internet Appliance makes getting to your e-mail and the Internet as easy as 1-2-3. With a simple setup, no software to load and built-in help, no computer experience is necessary.
That's right! The perfect device for all of you computer-literate Generation Y kids that have trouble "getting to your e-mail and the Internet."
Before proclaiming me "wrong" again, I suggest that you do some research. Internet Appliances are a market segment with which I am extremely familiar. I know a lot about where ads were placed, the target demographics, the manufacturing costs, and the technology.
By the way, you claim the failure of Internet appliances was because "they were crap, plain and simple." Then tell us what they did wrong and how you would have made a successful Internet appliance. Don't go off on any flights of fancy with 21" LCD monitors, wireless networking, and gigahertz processors for $99. Tell us, in realistic terms, how you could make an Internet appliance that would be a commercial success.