There are a few bits in the complaint itself where the lawyermonkeys make some vague reference to things that sound like they could be really dastardly deeds, the kind of things best revealed only in open court (well, at least on the lawyerly TV shows).
"Data path defects hindered the software's ability to correctly transmit the vote from the screen to the system."
"Spillane, Herzong and other quality engineers complained that parts of the voting system were not being documented"
"One such defect, a design problem, left the software unable to properly track certain "events," which in turn threatened the loss of votes, and endangered efficient and timely operation of the polls."
If the editor[s] reviewing submissions aren't reading both the submission and the article in quick succession, then rejecting the less good combination and/or accepting the more better combination of the two, then, umm...?
I'd be interested in trying that along with a previous poster's suggestion to mix it with 98Lite. I tweaked many iterations of VPC/98/XP recently, and have to admit that it seems that 6.1 with a lightish XP SP1 is the fastest-feeling overall for me to screw around in Access with.
*actually visualizes spending the next few hours doing that*
And really, who can turn down a chance to install Windows on a rainy Sunday afternoon? Hmm... maybe I'll just play some more Quake and check back later to see if anybody else got it working. Yeah, that sounds a bit better. Have fun, guys.
Likewise, if film profitability drops due to piracy being a much larger factor than it has been in the past, the studios will look for ways to cut costs. Perhaps they'll consider moving more productions to Canada or other countries where labor is cheaper.
I live in one of those areas: Wilmington, NC. We have/had a movie industry here because production costs were too high in/near Hollywood. I myself have worked on some low-budget movies of the week in my younger days. Same goes for Vancouver, BC from what I've heard. So as you keep hearing in other contexts, moving to an area where labor is cheaper is not always unmitigated evil for all.
That idea is why I put in the bit about Hollywood taking their toys and going home. If for any reason whatsoever movies become less profitable, the production companies can always cut expenses by reducing pay, reducing headcount, moving offshore, etc. That's true for any business. When it's simply not profitable for a business to operate in a given market space, they will (ideally) stop operating in that market space. At that point, another business can try to operate profitably in the resulting void.
So unless you believe that nobody will ever again be able to turn a profit making movies, I fail to see a problem with the current production houses being consigned to the scrap heap of history. Or they could, you know, adapt and all. Their choice.
I always point out one of two key facts to the people sitting near me when I see those little propagandlets:
A) The guy on screen was most likely paid up front for his work, he's not getting a percentage of the box office take, so "piracy" doesn't affect him. (unless you belive Hollywood is gonna pack up their toys and go home, *and* that nobody will step up to replace them)
2) The people being forced to sit through this shit are the ones that just *paid* to see the damn movie.
It's interesting to see a 'sharing == theft' argument that acknowledges that some forms of sharing require one party to be deprived of the possession of an item, when others don't.
That fascinates me because the RIAA/MPAA argument is essentially that property has been *stolen* whether or not an item has been removed from their posession, yet this line of reasoning seems to indicate that physical posession is paramount with regard to the difference between copyright infringment and fair use.
I would like to announce that I am now the very first Slashdot user to point out that Spymac.com offers a 1GB email service. That's right, you heard it here first. (and, uhh, don't scroll up.)
Thanks. People have been declaring me Friend at an alarming rate lately, so I figure that's gotta be why. (It certainly ain't the crap I've been posting!)
Also, I can't claim it as my own. Shit, now I feel obligated to go track down the/. user I snaked it from.
I'd be worried just as much about them having tamper protection, although for different reasons. Seems like things under the hood could get very DMCA-ish very quickly.
While this may well be the beginning of a horrible slippery slope, it's hard to feel for the driver in this case. Three times the speed limit? Fuckin' hang him.
I purchased CodeTek's Virtual Desktop a while back, and basically ignored Exposé when 10.3 came out. I decided to give it a shot a few weeks ago, and am now in the "how the hell did I live without it?" camp. It's even better when you've got some spare mouse buttons to dedicate to it.
Heh. I swear I started to type the word 'vacuum' as well as the term 'low pressure' but backspaced on both because I didn't wanna misstate anything, so I figured I'd stay generic enough to not be pounced on as an idiot.
The term 'ground effects' typically refers to the fiberglass spoilers and skirting that (if done properly) induce downforce under the car to hold it down to the road at high speeds, similar in design and function to that found on Formula 1 racers.
The correct term for neon lights under your car is 'a waste of fucking money.'
I've been wondering if the implication is what I think it is... if you use MS software through-and-through you're fine, but if you mix software from multiple companies, you're liable to InterTrust for royalties?
Could MS have crafted a sweeter deal if they tried? (ya know, other than the half billion dollar payout)
Well, I've gotten a *LOT* of positive feedback on my email address, and it's not from an ISP or a big internet company. (Yes, it's that one right next to my username.)
Slashdot Mirror
We use Scantrons here in NC, and we feed the ballot into it face down.
Sure, we're bass ackwards in almost every other conceivable way, but according to the laws of averages, we had to get *something* right.
Disturbing at best.
If the editor[s] reviewing submissions aren't reading both the submission and the article in quick succession, then rejecting the less good combination and/or accepting the more better combination of the two, then, umm...?
I just used up my mod points and you're already on my Friends list, so, umm...
Is that comment available as a t-shirt?
Would that be the dreaded Raw Sockets support that Steve Gibson got himself so apoplectic over a while back?
If so, then yes, it would seem Windows can do that now.
And apparently Mr. Gibson doesn't think that's such a great idea, or something.
I live in one of those areas: Wilmington, NC. We have/had a movie industry here because production costs were too high in/near Hollywood. I myself have worked on some low-budget movies of the week in my younger days. Same goes for Vancouver, BC from what I've heard. So as you keep hearing in other contexts, moving to an area where labor is cheaper is not always unmitigated evil for all.
That idea is why I put in the bit about Hollywood taking their toys and going home. If for any reason whatsoever movies become less profitable, the production companies can always cut expenses by reducing pay, reducing headcount, moving offshore, etc. That's true for any business. When it's simply not profitable for a business to operate in a given market space, they will (ideally) stop operating in that market space. At that point, another business can try to operate profitably in the resulting void.
So unless you believe that nobody will ever again be able to turn a profit making movies, I fail to see a problem with the current production houses being consigned to the scrap heap of history. Or they could, you know, adapt and all. Their choice.
I always point out one of two key facts to the people sitting near me when I see those little propagandlets:
A) The guy on screen was most likely paid up front for his work, he's not getting a percentage of the box office take, so "piracy" doesn't affect him. (unless you belive Hollywood is gonna pack up their toys and go home, *and* that nobody will step up to replace them)
2) The people being forced to sit through this shit are the ones that just *paid* to see the damn movie.
It's interesting to see a 'sharing == theft' argument that acknowledges that some forms of sharing require one party to be deprived of the possession of an item, when others don't.
That fascinates me because the RIAA/MPAA argument is essentially that property has been *stolen* whether or not an item has been removed from their posession, yet this line of reasoning seems to indicate that physical posession is paramount with regard to the difference between copyright infringment and fair use.
I would like to announce that I am now the very first Slashdot user to point out that Spymac.com offers a 1GB email service. That's right, you heard it here first. (and, uhh, don't scroll up.)
Thanks. People have been declaring me Friend at an alarming rate lately, so I figure that's gotta be why. (It certainly ain't the crap I've been posting!)
/. user I snaked it from.
Also, I can't claim it as my own. Shit, now I feel obligated to go track down the
I'd be worried just as much about them having tamper protection, although for different reasons. Seems like things under the hood could get very DMCA-ish very quickly.
While this may well be the beginning of a horrible slippery slope, it's hard to feel for the driver in this case. Three times the speed limit? Fuckin' hang him.
I purchased CodeTek's Virtual Desktop a while back, and basically ignored Exposé when 10.3 came out. I decided to give it a shot a few weeks ago, and am now in the "how the hell did I live without it?" camp. It's even better when you've got some spare mouse buttons to dedicate to it.
Heh. Right before I saw this response, I stuffed a paper envelope full of old-fashioned 1040 forms, so I guess Macs aren't even good for that, huh?
Anybody know why the videos don't play in Mplayer under OS X?
This is actually looks kinda cool, the still screenshots make me think it's a 3D answer to Apple's Expose. Might have to try it at work...
Heh. I swear I started to type the word 'vacuum' as well as the term 'low pressure' but backspaced on both because I didn't wanna misstate anything, so I figured I'd stay generic enough to not be pounced on as an idiot.
The term 'ground effects' typically refers to the fiberglass spoilers and skirting that (if done properly) induce downforce under the car to hold it down to the road at high speeds, similar in design and function to that found on Formula 1 racers.
The correct term for neon lights under your car is 'a waste of fucking money.'
Oops. Nice and clicky now.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/04/12/ms_settles _intertrust/
I've been wondering if the implication is what I think it is... if you use MS software through-and-through you're fine, but if you mix software from multiple companies, you're liable to InterTrust for royalties?
Could MS have crafted a sweeter deal if they tried? (ya know, other than the half billion dollar payout)
+1, Ironic
Well, I've gotten a *LOT* of positive feedback on my email address, and it's not from an ISP or a big internet company. (Yes, it's that one right next to my username.)
I think the workarounds on Google's part may have more to do with automated or seemingly automated transfers of the data rather than the data itself.