You're not "telling them they can't talk to me" -- you probably have no idea who "they" are! This list is the equivalent of saying "I don't want anyone calling me", which, I'm sorry, is not a Constitutionally guaranteed right (unlike the freedom of speech, which these telemarketers have.)
If your telephone number is public knowledge, people are allowed to call it! If you don't like it, you shouldn't have your telephone number listed!
I think it's ridiculous that this list enables people to get the equivalent of a restraining order without evidence and just cause.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
No law abridging the freedom of speech.
A law telling telemarketers that they cannot speak to you is unconstitutional.
Telemarketing is not, and never was, harassment. You have a phone number. People are allowed to call the phone and try to talk to you. There's no national "do not ring my doorbell" list.
You are the exception to the rule, my friend. IE is not unstable. You probably either have a memory problem or a DLL that got corrupted. The vast majority of people -- yes, Slashdotter, most people use IE -- are not experiencing the problem that you are having.
And furthermore, IE doesn't bring Windows down when it crashes, which was my original point, which you seem to have completely disregarded.
You always spout nonsense like "In short: Patents help stimulate innovation." but provide nothing to back this up.
Hello, nothing to back this up? I'm only GIVING YOU THE REASON that patents were invented in the first place. Patents. Any kind. Not just software patents, which actually have nothing to do with PHYSICAL ITEMS like LEXMARK CARTRIDGES.
You defend the RIAA, you defend the MPAA, you defend this whole idea of expansive patents and copyrights and I can't figure it out. You seem smart, you can write coherent messages, but ultimately, you're just so wrong on this.
If you actually read my posts, you'll see that I don't defend the RIAA and MPAA, so much as I attack piracy and theft.
Theft, piracy, etc. are not only illegal, but also immoral. No matter what kind of ridiculous, convoluted argument you put forth, taking something and not paying for it is simply not morally justifiable.
If you don't like what RIAA and MPAA do, then don't support them. Don't buy their music, don't buy their DVD's, don't go to see movies in the theater. But there is a world of difference between not supporting them and ripping them off. If you don't want to support Porsche, you don't buy a Porsche -- you don't go down to the lot and steal a 911.
Movies and music are luxury items, not necessities, there is no need for anybody to steal them, or pirate them, or copyright-violate them, or whatever clever loophole-exploiting term you're using this week.
The reason I get modded down all the time is not because I'm wrong, it's because everyone on Slashdot seems to be seeking some sort of rationalized justification for piracy so they can feel better about themselves and their bad behavior. No one here can actually construct a rational argument that piracy is morally justifiable (and don't give me the "relative morality" bullshit argument either -- genocide is OK from a relativistic moralism standpoint), so rather than accept that maybe they're wrong about something, the moderators decide to "-1, Troll" me. It's sad.
If patents didn't exist: Company A would invest a lot of money into something they were inventing. Company A would release said product. Company B would spend substantially less money purchasing a copy of Company A's product, reverse engineering it, and then market their own cloned product, and sell it for less because they didn't have the R&D overhead that company A did. Company A would realize it's not worth it to spend tons of money to invent something when Company B can just go copy it, sell it for less, and fuck them over.
pdf995 also prevents you from spending hundreds on Acrobat.
I'm not saying one suite is better than the other, but what I do know is this: a) Most companies use Office, so sending docs back and forth between companies using Office guarantees you can share documents b) OpenOffice doesn't always open Office things right (Word tables, bullet lists, as some previous comment on this story explained.)
The quote in the comment I responded to was "There's no way that I could pay nearly $4,000 for a freaking word processor at home. It just isn't going to happen." I interpreted that statement -- no single license for a word processor costs $4,000.
Microsoft Word isn't $4000, it's $199.88. The entire XP suite is $399.99.
There is a world of difference between $400 and $4000, especially considering that $400 gets you not only a word processor, but a spreadsheet, presentation software, database software, personal information management software, etc. etc. And clip art libraries. And all kinds of other useful crap.
It's not Microsoft's fault that people didn't patch their machines. Just like it's not Ford's fault if someone doesn't go and get their car fixed after they receive a recall notice.
Sounds digital? What does digital sound like? I think you're getting "digital" confused with "clean" and "analog" confused with "muddy". Are you actually going to compare an old Beatles recording to a Dream Theater recording and tell me there is a decline in sonic quality?
(FYI, I'm talking about sonic quality, not about music quality, so please don't go off on me about Dream Theater or the Beatles. Thank you.)
Windows reboots per day = how many? Employee downtime due to reboots = How many? Not to mention costs of licenses.
"Maintain and upgrade" != Reboots.
They're talking about patches, bugfixes, etc. etc. etc. Windows Update is easy and intuitive, and takes about 2 minutes to do (and 2 minutes to teach someone how to do it). No such luck on a Linux platform.
Licenses are a one-time cost, absorbed in the beginning. Ongoing maintenance costs could potentially be higher in the long run for Linux. It's not just about the cost of the license, people, time == money.
This is not a statement about which OS is better, just about which OS is easier to maintain, so please lay off with the "M$" bullshit, thank you.
Um, yes, I read the fucking article. And other articles, like this one, which states that Lamo "spoke openly of his exploits to SecurityFocus reporter Kevin Poulsen, according to Christine Mohan, a spokesperson at The New York Times."
And then, sure enough, I went to SecurityFocus and found this article.
The man practically wrote his own arrest warrant, why is everybody crying about it? HE ADMITTED TO THE CRIME TO A JOURNALIST!
Slashdot Mirror
You're not "telling them they can't talk to me" -- you probably have no idea who "they" are! This list is the equivalent of saying "I don't want anyone calling me", which, I'm sorry, is not a Constitutionally guaranteed right (unlike the freedom of speech, which these telemarketers have.)
If your telephone number is public knowledge, people are allowed to call it! If you don't like it, you shouldn't have your telephone number listed!
I think it's ridiculous that this list enables people to get the equivalent of a restraining order without evidence and just cause.
This problem is common; it also manifests itself in different ways, like outbursts of "But I swear I put the envelope on the kitchen counter!"
Did the envelope just WALK AWAY? No: You never put it there in the first place.
People, hanging up on the telemarketer is not the same as telling them to not call you!
The same telemarketer is not calling you persistently.
Therefore, it is not harassment, unless you can prove that all of the telemarketers are conspiring to harass you.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
No law abridging the freedom of speech.
A law telling telemarketers that they cannot speak to you is unconstitutional.
If you don't want to talk to them, hang up. Duh.
Telemarketing is not, and never was, harassment. You have a phone number. People are allowed to call the phone and try to talk to you. There's no national "do not ring my doorbell" list.
You are the exception to the rule, my friend. IE is not unstable. You probably either have a memory problem or a DLL that got corrupted. The vast majority of people -- yes, Slashdotter, most people use IE -- are not experiencing the problem that you are having.
And furthermore, IE doesn't bring Windows down when it crashes, which was my original point, which you seem to have completely disregarded.
Half of those links referred to IE3 or IE4 -- obsolete.
None of those links say anything about crashing Windows.
When IE crashes, it does not bring the entire system down.
Show me steps to reproduce stated behavior or quit wasting my time.
YOU ARE TEH FUNNAY!!!! ROFL LOL WTF11!!11!!1
MICRO$OFT IS TEH WRONG!!!! EVIL BILL GATES 6 6 6
Please, by all means, demonstrate this for me. Explain the steps I should take to reproduce this behavior.
I think that they did an Enron, and have been good at hiding it.
Why? Because they're "Micro$oft"? Or do you have actual evidence to support such a claim?
If it has a name like numpoints, it's an int
int? Int32? Int64? short? Maybe it's a float?
You always spout nonsense like "In short: Patents help stimulate innovation." but provide nothing to back this up.
Hello, nothing to back this up? I'm only GIVING YOU THE REASON that patents were invented in the first place. Patents. Any kind. Not just software patents, which actually have nothing to do with PHYSICAL ITEMS like LEXMARK CARTRIDGES.
You defend the RIAA, you defend the MPAA, you defend this whole idea of expansive patents and copyrights and I can't figure it out. You seem smart, you can write coherent messages, but ultimately, you're just so wrong on this.
If you actually read my posts, you'll see that I don't defend the RIAA and MPAA, so much as I attack piracy and theft.
Theft, piracy, etc. are not only illegal, but also immoral. No matter what kind of ridiculous, convoluted argument you put forth, taking something and not paying for it is simply not morally justifiable.
If you don't like what RIAA and MPAA do, then don't support them. Don't buy their music, don't buy their DVD's, don't go to see movies in the theater. But there is a world of difference between not supporting them and ripping them off. If you don't want to support Porsche, you don't buy a Porsche -- you don't go down to the lot and steal a 911.
Movies and music are luxury items, not necessities, there is no need for anybody to steal them, or pirate them, or copyright-violate them, or whatever clever loophole-exploiting term you're using this week.
The reason I get modded down all the time is not because I'm wrong, it's because everyone on Slashdot seems to be seeking some sort of rationalized justification for piracy so they can feel better about themselves and their bad behavior. No one here can actually construct a rational argument that piracy is morally justifiable (and don't give me the "relative morality" bullshit argument either -- genocide is OK from a relativistic moralism standpoint), so rather than accept that maybe they're wrong about something, the moderators decide to "-1, Troll" me. It's sad.
If patents didn't exist:
Company A would invest a lot of money into something they were inventing.
Company A would release said product.
Company B would spend substantially less money purchasing a copy of Company A's product, reverse engineering it, and then market their own cloned product, and sell it for less because they didn't have the R&D overhead that company A did.
Company A would realize it's not worth it to spend tons of money to invent something when Company B can just go copy it, sell it for less, and fuck them over.
In short: Patents help stimulate innovation.
DNA?? Who the hell calls Douglas Adams "DNA"? Laaaaaaaaaaame
Heh. That would be funny if you had actual proof of this, that didn't involve an Office document that had been corrupted somehow.
no need to spend hundreds on Acrobat
pdf995 also prevents you from spending hundreds on Acrobat.
I'm not saying one suite is better than the other, but what I do know is this:
a) Most companies use Office, so sending docs back and forth between companies using Office guarantees you can share documents
b) OpenOffice doesn't always open Office things right (Word tables, bullet lists, as some previous comment on this story explained.)
Then, there is the support issue...
The quote in the comment I responded to was "There's no way that I could pay nearly $4,000 for a freaking word processor at home. It just isn't going to happen." I interpreted that statement -- no single license for a word processor costs $4,000.
Microsoft Word isn't $4000, it's $199.88. The entire XP suite is $399.99.
There is a world of difference between $400 and $4000, especially considering that $400 gets you not only a word processor, but a spreadsheet, presentation software, database software, personal information management software, etc. etc. And clip art libraries. And all kinds of other useful crap.
It's not Microsoft's fault that people didn't patch their machines. Just like it's not Ford's fault if someone doesn't go and get their car fixed after they receive a recall notice.
Sounds digital? What does digital sound like? I think you're getting "digital" confused with "clean" and "analog" confused with "muddy". Are you actually going to compare an old Beatles recording to a Dream Theater recording and tell me there is a decline in sonic quality?
(FYI, I'm talking about sonic quality, not about music quality, so please don't go off on me about Dream Theater or the Beatles. Thank you.)
Why am I a troll? Because I said something in favor of Windows?? Blow me, dude!
Windows reboots per day = how many? Employee downtime due to reboots = How many? Not to mention costs of licenses.
"Maintain and upgrade" != Reboots.
They're talking about patches, bugfixes, etc. etc. etc. Windows Update is easy and intuitive, and takes about 2 minutes to do (and 2 minutes to teach someone how to do it). No such luck on a Linux platform.
Licenses are a one-time cost, absorbed in the beginning. Ongoing maintenance costs could potentially be higher in the long run for Linux. It's not just about the cost of the license, people, time == money.
This is not a statement about which OS is better, just about which OS is easier to maintain, so please lay off with the "M$" bullshit, thank you.
Um, yes, I read the fucking article. And other articles, like this one, which states that Lamo "spoke openly of his exploits to SecurityFocus reporter Kevin Poulsen, according to Christine Mohan, a spokesperson at The New York Times."
And then, sure enough, I went to SecurityFocus and found this article.
The man practically wrote his own arrest warrant, why is everybody crying about it? HE ADMITTED TO THE CRIME TO A JOURNALIST!
From the sound of it? Sound of what? Sounded to me like they had plenty of evidence.
You should ALWAYS cite works quoted. Didn't you learn anything in school?