A video/arcade game auction is a good place to get pinball machines. A buddy of mine lucked out and got a Simpsons one for a few hundred dollars. It's godly.
Not only this let's assume you have some stroke of genius and throw together something really amazing then submit it using your company's computer. This block may also save your company the legal trouble of suing for the rights to your work since you in fact created it at work on their machine. Granted now you may not get to have a stroke of genius, but you can sleep sound at night knowing that you have been stifled for the greater good.
I would imagine mp3 restricted really means P2P restricted. If this is true, I think it shows poor word choice, but at the same time it conveys a more clear (albeit misleading and broad) message for the average user.
Walmart is about the only US company I can think of that can actually take on MS. Walmart isn't really rooted in the technology industry so they don't stand to lose as much as say, Dell, from taking a stab at selling Lindows computers. I think most of us who know anything about MS know that the reason that Dell, HP, etc. etc... don't sell machines without Windows or even dual-boot machines with something other than two versions of Windows is because MS would revoke their license to sell Windows.
Screw the "legions of rednecks" idea, I believe there are many people who are curious enough about other OSes to get an extra computer, especially since they are supposed to be cheap, from Walmart just to poke around. Who knows once the average Joe realized that their are other options maybe he'll download some Debian images and never use Windows again.
Hell yeah, vote Libertarian. In principle it makes sense at least. However one could argue that a "good" Libertarian government (which wouldn't be much of one) is similar to the purest form of democracy, a unanimous direct one. All the laws that are made are basically what everyone would have done anyway. Problem is no one is sensible and reasonable all the time. By God, if I wanna get drunk and high and shoot my.38 into the air I damn well better be able to. Anyone who thinks otherwise is itchin fer a fight.
That's very interesting about those movies. Are they edited based on explicit content or on, say, "artistic intent or meaning"? I wonder how many movies are even more horrible without all that distracting eye-candy and bloodlust.:)
Right, but freedom doesn't mean whatever, whenever, whoever. There is a reason why it is illegal to publish child pornography (yes I know that's not what the ruling was about). Same reason that a 13yr old boy can't walk into a beer store and by Playboy. The law states that parents' ability to police their children's activities online is becoming more and more difficult. It also says that as a result government has a responsilibity to help. It would be hard to stop Timmy from buying Playboy on the walk home from school, so there is a law to prevent him from doing so.
No doubt, as the articles say, Congress did have good intentions here. It was aiming to make it difficult for children to get pornography even without their parents around - just like the beer store scenario. The problem here is that in the beer store the person working there can use his/her judgement and stop the child. Even with preventative measures on the Internet it would be similar to porn locked up in a case of sorts, no person working at the beer store, and the child possessing sufficient skills to pick the lock. The beer store could have a camera or some other security device that monitors the case, but on the Internet how would this be implemented? Would there be a system where each user is tracked where they go? I don't think so.
Then what if the site is hosted outside the United States? Then, as one poster has laready said, what if the owner of the site vacations in Florida, will they be arrested?
This law is messy. This subject is messy, and I don't have an answer.
So, you could keep the Chinese Army out of Fort Knox?
That's not what I think the poster was saying.
For example, do you think Fort Knox is secure? Could it keep out the Chinese Army if they invaded?
This means that NO ONE could keep the Chinese Army out if it invaded. The point is that ironclad security is merely a pipedream. Guns could be illegal in some nation, but does that mean that a truly motivated individual or group of individuals couldn't obtain them and use them to the demise of others?
If yelling "fire" in a theatre wasn't illegal then what person would actually use the legality of it as an excuse to yell "fire" in a theatre? And what is the difference? How and why do we need laws to knock some sense into people that would otherwise be blind to the fact that yelling "fire" would be stupid and endager people? It might be because some people act on a perceived social contract and utilitarian principles and others act on consequences alone.
There is often a big difference between an individual's right to free speech and a corporation's (which I would argue doesn't have one, as stated by the Constitution at least). Enron could say that its company had a right to say whatever it wanted to pump up stock prices. At the same time could the company get off free from one charge or another if the executives say that they were using their individual rights and not corporate ones.
If we are going to burn something for fuel lets burn hydrogen, but if we don't have to let's burn nothing. Tidal, wind, and solar power are far more renewable and safe. In Texas some deregulation laws have allowed a company, Green Mountain Energy (they use wind power primarily), to supply energy to the grid based on consumer demand. If enough people switch the utilites will simply be a delivery service.
The idea of an actual hydrogen car seems a little silly. Sure gas is explosive but a hydrogen car is a bomb. Ill take an electric/solar car thanks, and one powered by wind/sun/tides over one by hydrogen.
Do you not think that there would just be a new group of powerful companies selling hydrogen instead?
Yes, but WHY are oil companies disliked? Among other reasons because they pollute with relative impunity. Oil is dirty, chemicals from oil refining harm people. I would choose a hydrogen monopoly over an oil monopoly anyday.
I heard about this on NPR yesterday. It definitely sounds scary and I don't support it, but unless Americans have completely forgotten some of their libertrian roots, I could see it happening. All Dubya has gotta do is get up and say, "Well with a connected database, the INS would have known that some of the 9-11 hijackers had warrants out." Nuff said.
The longer this idea takes to get into the mainstream though, the better. For once maybe our tendency to forget something (Sept. 11) when CNN stops covering it will play to our collective advantage.
"including preferences you can set from the command line to make everything 10% faster"
Is this so in case they don't think of anything new or develop improvements by the time the market demands an upgrade they can make these preferences the defaults and cover their tails?
I don't see charging for StarOffice as a problem. Sun does a hell of a job with their cross-platform office suite. If they want to start charging (as long as the price isn't completely insane) fine. I buy music, I buy video games, why should I EXPECT StarOffice to be free?
Did ESR seem a little on edge to anyone else? His comments seemed to get pretty violent.
"In that case StarOffice just died. They just shot StarOffice through the head.... if OpenOffice still exists, and it's GPLed, and they're going to start charging for StarOffice, then they just shot StarOffice through the head."
"rationally appropriate to cannibalize your own business"
"shareholders will kill you"
Maybe he's tired of people at Slashdot calling him an idiot.
What do you mean "after Linux"? That's like asking what about AFTER Unix, oh wait...
The fact that Linux IS open sourced gives it an EDGE at survival over the long term. Proprietary systems' ability to succeed in the long run depend on how much money XYZ Corp. is willing to throw at it. At some point business managers and the like will say it's not worth it, let's get someone to replace this monstrosity and be done with it. This is to say that there is a limit to how long that system might last. On the other had Linux is bound only by the will and love of the thousands of people around the world developing and millions using it. It's also safe to assume that this bound is greater than the limits in funding from corporations since as a general rule if funding is provided based on demand by the market we wouldn't have had Linux in the first place. Sure Linux may exist in some form but if corporations would have, a long time ago, provided everything Linux is in a proprietary system I bet most of us would be using that system now.
The only problem I see with personal info collection online is that you may not get a choice.
For instance: I just got one of those nifty George Foreman grills and with it came a little card that asks me stuff like why I got it, who I am, etc. I may fill this out or I may not fill this out. While if I sign up for some website, they may require that I fill all these things before I can register.
Personally I haven't really experience a lot of these probing questions from websites, most that I see don't require personal information other than name, address, birthday, credit card, etc., but this would be required if I were to subscribe to a magazine through the mail.
While it's all well and good that we at Slashdot will bash MS at every opportunity, substantiated or not, I wonder what other companies have to say about this. My school is probably going to teach Java over C++ and C starting next year. How will this change to curriculum affect what happens the real world? Hell, most students (most people too) don't even know what.NET is.
If one has a PS2 and this Linux distro, why would one even need a computer at all. Set the cable modem next to the monitor/television and you are set. I don't follow Windows emulators but, if also there were a very good one out there I could watch the Simpsons and play Civ3 during commercials, without even having to SPIN THE CHAIR. This is truly beautiful.:,)
Slashdot Mirror
A video/arcade game auction is a good place to get pinball machines. A buddy of mine lucked out and got a Simpsons one for a few hundred dollars. It's godly.
Not only this let's assume you have some stroke of genius and throw together something really amazing then submit it using your company's computer. This block may also save your company the legal trouble of suing for the rights to your work since you in fact created it at work on their machine. Granted now you may not get to have a stroke of genius, but you can sleep sound at night knowing that you have been stifled for the greater good.
I would imagine mp3 restricted really means P2P restricted. If this is true, I think it shows poor word choice, but at the same time it conveys a more clear (albeit misleading and broad) message for the average user.
Walmart is about the only US company I can think of that can actually take on MS. Walmart isn't really rooted in the technology industry so they don't stand to lose as much as say, Dell, from taking a stab at selling Lindows computers. I think most of us who know anything about MS know that the reason that Dell, HP, etc. etc... don't sell machines without Windows or even dual-boot machines with something other than two versions of Windows is because MS would revoke their license to sell Windows.
Screw the "legions of rednecks" idea, I believe there are many people who are curious enough about other OSes to get an extra computer, especially since they are supposed to be cheap, from Walmart just to poke around. Who knows once the average Joe realized that their are other options maybe he'll download some Debian images and never use Windows again.
Cheers to Walmart, good job guys.
I've thought about this for awhile. If I could afford an uber-laptop I would play EQ in bed and take naps while I regenerate. I need serious help.
Hell yeah, vote Libertarian. In principle it makes sense at least. However one could argue that a "good" Libertarian government (which wouldn't be much of one) is similar to the purest form of democracy, a unanimous direct one. All the laws that are made are basically what everyone would have done anyway. Problem is no one is sensible and reasonable all the time. By God, if I wanna get drunk and high and shoot my .38 into the air I damn well better be able to. Anyone who thinks otherwise is itchin fer a fight.
Mod : Troll, Offtopic, Flaimbait
That's very interesting about those movies. Are they edited based on explicit content or on, say, "artistic intent or meaning"? I wonder how many movies are even more horrible without all that distracting eye-candy and bloodlust. :)
Right, but freedom doesn't mean whatever, whenever, whoever. There is a reason why it is illegal to publish child pornography (yes I know that's not what the ruling was about). Same reason that a 13yr old boy can't walk into a beer store and by Playboy. The law states that parents' ability to police their children's activities online is becoming more and more difficult. It also says that as a result government has a responsilibity to help. It would be hard to stop Timmy from buying Playboy on the walk home from school, so there is a law to prevent him from doing so.
No doubt, as the articles say, Congress did have good intentions here. It was aiming to make it difficult for children to get pornography even without their parents around - just like the beer store scenario. The problem here is that in the beer store the person working there can use his/her judgement and stop the child. Even with preventative measures on the Internet it would be similar to porn locked up in a case of sorts, no person working at the beer store, and the child possessing sufficient skills to pick the lock. The beer store could have a camera or some other security device that monitors the case, but on the Internet how would this be implemented? Would there be a system where each user is tracked where they go? I don't think so.
Then what if the site is hosted outside the United States? Then, as one poster has laready said, what if the owner of the site vacations in Florida, will they be arrested?
This law is messy. This subject is messy, and I don't have an answer.
So, you could keep the Chinese Army out of Fort Knox?
That's not what I think the poster was saying.
For example, do you think Fort Knox is secure? Could it keep out the Chinese Army if they invaded?
This means that NO ONE could keep the Chinese Army out if it invaded. The point is that ironclad security is merely a pipedream. Guns could be illegal in some nation, but does that mean that a truly motivated individual or group of individuals couldn't obtain them and use them to the demise of others?
If yelling "fire" in a theatre wasn't illegal then what person would actually use the legality of it as an excuse to yell "fire" in a theatre? And what is the difference? How and why do we need laws to knock some sense into people that would otherwise be blind to the fact that yelling "fire" would be stupid and endager people? It might be because some people act on a perceived social contract and utilitarian principles and others act on consequences alone.
There is often a big difference between an individual's right to free speech and a corporation's (which I would argue doesn't have one, as stated by the Constitution at least). Enron could say that its company had a right to say whatever it wanted to pump up stock prices. At the same time could the company get off free from one charge or another if the executives say that they were using their individual rights and not corporate ones.
If we are going to burn something for fuel lets burn hydrogen, but if we don't have to let's burn nothing. Tidal, wind, and solar power are far more renewable and safe. In Texas some deregulation laws have allowed a company, Green Mountain Energy (they use wind power primarily), to supply energy to the grid based on consumer demand. If enough people switch the utilites will simply be a delivery service.
The idea of an actual hydrogen car seems a little silly. Sure gas is explosive but a hydrogen car is a bomb. Ill take an electric/solar car thanks, and one powered by wind/sun/tides over one by hydrogen.
Do you not think that there would just be a new group of powerful companies selling hydrogen instead?
Yes, but WHY are oil companies disliked? Among other reasons because they pollute with relative impunity. Oil is dirty, chemicals from oil refining harm people. I would choose a hydrogen monopoly over an oil monopoly anyday.
I heard about this on NPR yesterday. It definitely sounds scary and I don't support it, but unless Americans have completely forgotten some of their libertrian roots, I could see it happening. All Dubya has gotta do is get up and say, "Well with a connected database, the INS would have known that some of the 9-11 hijackers had warrants out." Nuff said.
The longer this idea takes to get into the mainstream though, the better. For once maybe our tendency to forget something (Sept. 11) when CNN stops covering it will play to our collective advantage.
as long as i can turn off that annoying javascript im happy.
For the past year, I have searched for a single device that could replace my cellular telephone, PDA, and pager.
duct tape and matches
AP Wire - All Tier 1 OEMs announce shipment of new digital pens to replace keyboards per MS licensing changes.
CN: Rev. Taco, with all that's happened to us today, I kinda feel like Job.
Taco: Well, aren't you being a tad melodramatic, Ned? Also, I believe Job was right-handed.
CN: But Reverend, I need to know. Is God punishing me?
Taco: Ooh, short answer: "yes" with an "if." Long answer: "no" with a "but."
enough is enough.
"including preferences you can set from the command line to make everything 10% faster"
Is this so in case they don't think of anything new or develop improvements by the time the market demands an upgrade they can make these preferences the defaults and cover their tails?
Oh well, MICROSOFT SUCKS.
+1 MS Bashing mod me up.
Given the nature of Slashdot, this may be one of the best forms of consumer feedback I've ever seen.
I have no problem with this so long as I don't start seeing ascii art of goatse.cx at BestBuy.
I don't see charging for StarOffice as a problem. Sun does a hell of a job with their cross-platform office suite. If they want to start charging (as long as the price isn't completely insane) fine. I buy music, I buy video games, why should I EXPECT StarOffice to be free?
Did ESR seem a little on edge to anyone else? His comments seemed to get pretty violent.
"In that case StarOffice just died. They just shot StarOffice through the head.... if OpenOffice still exists, and it's GPLed, and they're going to start charging for StarOffice, then they just shot StarOffice through the head."
"rationally appropriate to cannibalize your own business"
"shareholders will kill you"
Maybe he's tired of people at Slashdot calling him an idiot.
What do you mean "after Linux"? That's like asking what about AFTER Unix, oh wait...
The fact that Linux IS open sourced gives it an EDGE at survival over the long term. Proprietary systems' ability to succeed in the long run depend on how much money XYZ Corp. is willing to throw at it. At some point business managers and the like will say it's not worth it, let's get someone to replace this monstrosity and be done with it. This is to say that there is a limit to how long that system might last. On the other had Linux is bound only by the will and love of the thousands of people around the world developing and millions using it. It's also safe to assume that this bound is greater than the limits in funding from corporations since as a general rule if funding is provided based on demand by the market we wouldn't have had Linux in the first place. Sure Linux may exist in some form but if corporations would have, a long time ago, provided everything Linux is in a proprietary system I bet most of us would be using that system now.
The only problem I see with personal info collection online is that you may not get a choice.
For instance:
I just got one of those nifty George Foreman grills and with it came a little card that asks me stuff like why I got it, who I am, etc. I may fill this out or I may not fill this out. While if I sign up for some website, they may require that I fill all these things before I can register.
Personally I haven't really experience a lot of these probing questions from websites, most that I see don't require personal information other than name, address, birthday, credit card, etc., but this would be required if I were to subscribe to a magazine through the mail.
While it's all well and good that we at Slashdot will bash MS at every opportunity, substantiated or not, I wonder what other companies have to say about this. My school is probably going to teach Java over C++ and C starting next year. How will this change to curriculum affect what happens the real world? Hell, most students (most people too) don't even know what .NET is.
If one has a PS2 and this Linux distro, why would one even need a computer at all. Set the cable modem next to the monitor/television and you are set. I don't follow Windows emulators but, if also there were a very good one out there I could watch the Simpsons and play Civ3 during commercials, without even having to SPIN THE CHAIR. This is truly beautiful. :,)