It's nice see a large PC company like Dell is saying a big "%#$@ you" to Microsoft by using their own clause against.
Something simple like FreeDOS is the better choice, because although Linux can be "free", it wouldn't be if offered by Dell. Supporting it could cost a lot.
A cease and desist order must have been sent like always...
First of all, why are we no longer allowed by law to play with, change, and generally learn from things we OWN??? And why aren't we allowed to share what we have learned with people who have the same interest?
Yes, mod chips, whether for the PSX or Xbox, are used to play illegal copies of games. Hell, most people probably buy them for that very reason. Yes, Napster and other P2P software/services provide a way for people to illegally obtain and distribute music. Most people probably use them for this too.
At the same time, both also provide a means of using the platform legally. Mod chips allow people to develop software for the console. P2P can be and is often used to distribute with the consent of the copyright holder. Must one except to only use "official" software and accessories in order to buy a gaming console? Is this clause in writing anywhere? Although I really have no idea, I think not!
Just like the above technologies, guns are often used to commit crimes. They are also used legally to hunt and for target shooting. Guns are still and will always be legal even though they are often used to END life. Have you ever heard about a modchip or P2P being used to kill someone?
My point is, each of these are nothing more than tools, and people choose how they are used. In the case of a gun, the consequence of illegal use can be much worst. Yet we still have guns because they are not always used to commit crimes. Why isn't technology viewed the same way?
Cash cows with money to burn legally threaten poor chumps over and over just only to end up fighting a baseless case when it goes to court. The chump caves much of the time in order to avoid the cost of a legal fight!
Why is the Internet becoming the television?
on
Smart Routers
·
· Score: 1
Dear world,
What will faster and smarter routers do for the net? I suspect that they will not do much anything if content continues to evolve like it is presently.
I have thoroughly enjoyed my cable modem since receiving it in January of 1999. Home broadband connections are absolutely great, and they allow for those of us with one to receive data, regardless of type, at much higher speeds! This is benefit in many different ways!
Personally, since I work from home, I value the always-on feature more than the increase in speed. I care nothing about video-on-demand and net radio. I have two televisions and a stereo for that type of media.
The Internet would not be so congested if it wasn't for all of this "fat" data moving around. The powers-that-be are pushing this very type, because they want for the Internet to be interactive TV. Text-based and still image-based content effectively conveys information to me.
My question to the world is:
Why must the Internet become the television instead of simply being a compliment to it?
Nothing is free! Everything offering is accompanied by an expectation! That might be money, a person's appreciation, information pertaining to your buying patterns, ad exposure, or anything else.
Although, the commercialization of the net has yielded wonderful tools, a line should be drawn to prevent the Internet from becoming the InterTV. I don't mind paying a reasonable price for something I want or need.
Before entering the mainstream, although not as flashy nor as vast, the net was a great resource. A comfortable balance between free and pay-for-use content is needed. Costs are traditionally associated with money, but convenience has a value too!
Slashdot Mirror
Dear World,
It's nice see a large PC company like Dell is saying a big "%#$@ you" to Microsoft by using their own clause against.
Something simple like FreeDOS is the better choice, because although Linux can be "free", it wouldn't be if offered by Dell. Supporting it could cost a lot.
Later,
-Slashdot Junky
M$ head lawyer, Satan, must have been on vacation so they had to wait!
A cease and desist order must have been sent like always...
First of all, why are we no longer allowed by law to play with, change, and generally learn from things we OWN??? And why aren't we allowed to share what we have learned with people who have the same interest?
Yes, mod chips, whether for the PSX or Xbox, are used to play illegal copies of games. Hell, most people probably buy them for that very reason. Yes, Napster and other P2P software/services provide a way for people to illegally obtain and distribute music. Most people probably use them for this too.
At the same time, both also provide a means of using the platform legally. Mod chips allow people to develop software for the console. P2P can be and is often used to distribute with the consent of the copyright holder. Must one except to only use "official" software and accessories in order to buy a gaming console? Is this clause in writing anywhere? Although I really have no idea, I think not!
Just like the above technologies, guns are often used to commit crimes. They are also used legally to hunt and for target shooting. Guns are still and will always be legal even though they are often used to END life. Have you ever heard about a modchip or P2P being used to kill someone?
My point is, each of these are nothing more than tools, and people choose how they are used. In the case of a gun, the consequence of illegal use can be much worst. Yet we still have guns because they are not always used to commit crimes. Why isn't technology viewed the same way?
Cash cows with money to burn legally threaten poor chumps over and over just only to end up fighting a baseless case when it goes to court. The chump caves much of the time in order to avoid the cost of a legal fight!
Dear world,
What will faster and smarter routers do for the net? I suspect that they will not do much anything if content continues to evolve like it is presently.
I have thoroughly enjoyed my cable modem since receiving it in January of 1999. Home broadband connections are absolutely great, and they allow for those of us with one to receive data, regardless of type, at much higher speeds! This is benefit in many different ways!
Personally, since I work from home, I value the always-on feature more than the increase in speed. I care nothing about video-on-demand and net radio. I have two televisions and a stereo for that type of media.
The Internet would not be so congested if it wasn't for all of this "fat" data moving around. The powers-that-be are pushing this very type, because they want for the Internet to be interactive TV. Text-based and still image-based content effectively conveys information to me.
My question to the world is:
Why must the Internet become the television instead of simply being a compliment to it?
Sincerely,
Clay Smith
Nothing is free! Everything offering is accompanied by an expectation! That might be money, a person's appreciation, information pertaining to your buying patterns, ad exposure, or anything else.
Although, the commercialization of the net has yielded wonderful tools, a line should be drawn to prevent the Internet from becoming the InterTV. I don't mind paying a reasonable price for something I want or need.
Before entering the mainstream, although not as flashy nor as vast, the net was a great resource. A comfortable balance between free and pay-for-use content is needed. Costs are traditionally associated with money, but convenience has a value too!
What is convenience worth to you?