Suppose this girl got dropped off at the mall to hang out with some friends, and she met this guy there. Should we sue the mall for its role in the situation?
Yes, we should. I believe the legal 'principle' involved means going after the party with the largest bank balance, on the grounds that it's easier for them to pay you to go away; see SCO vs IBM, or countless dubious patent infringement lawsuits.
This is why tables were popularized in the first place. The lay-person who just wanted to throw up a personal web page had neither the time, nor the inclination to learn CSS, so they resorted to the easiest possible manner of positioning things the way they wanted: tables.
When tables were popularised in the first place, Netscape 4 ruled the web. Have you ever tried to use its CSS support?
They aren't being very independent in thought if they are just slavishly following the market, though. These hacks may as well be working for the major corporations as far as consumers are concerned, as it's just more crappy thoughtless slush in the marketplace -- the only link in the chain missing is the corporate paycheck.
This is a great design for a textbook, but it's no good in the real world. What happens when you want to make use of your network card's TCP offload engine?
Maybe we need to start redesigning our hardware as well?
Actually, it was more of a comment on the UK's slow decline into fascism (i.e. executive government, run mainly for the benefit of the major corporations, with none of the checks and balances that a liberal democracy usually has).
Why stop with just one branch of government, if we're planning demolitions?
may I suggest that you continue publishing stories about "Lesbian Vicars" for those knucklescrapers who continue to find amusement for their unicellular brains in your newspaper
If it keeps making money, I'm sure he'll have no problem doing so. But if those numbskulls prefer to receive video-chat invitations from the same 'lesbian vicars' on their 3G mobiles at 5 quid/minute, Rupert wants his minions to be able to sniff out that opportunity, exploit it and (preferably) monopolise it.
(I quite like that the/. tags for this story read "die, murdoch, media" at the moment -- I couldn't have put it better myself:)
HB:HG is best read as fiction, though (and the claim to fact is just part of that fiction). In every chapter they postulate certain events with "Wouldn't it be amazing if..." and "Well, these two people may have met once so they were obviously colluding for thirty years". By the next chapter anything advanced in the previous one is accepted as gospel truth (pardon the pun). Also, Pierre Plantard has been unmasked as a hoaxer for many years now, since before they wrote their books IIRC.
From what I've read of DVC, anyway, Brown is a hack of the worst kind and couldn't even be bothered disguising or embelleshing his appropriations. Even if money talks and he wins this case, it won't make him a good writer -- just a rich and successful one. Maybe his next victims will be luckier.
Even if they did manage to gain an effective monopoly (e.g. 90% plus) of online delivery of corporate media content, that's not necessarily illegal. What would be illegal would be unfairly using their position to maintain or extend the monopoly... which would mean they'd need to be transparent and careful in their pricing, corporate actions, etc. if they ever got that far.
It's unlikely to happen, anyway -- if Apple says to, e.g., Sony or Warner, "My way or the highway", those companies are big enough to build their own road system in preference to travelling on Apple's. Also, Sony, Warner et. al. would always be keeping alternative means of online distribution on the back burner in case of any legal/technical/financial problems with their relationships with Apple.
Slashdot Mirror
Suppose this girl got dropped off at the mall to hang out with some friends, and she met this guy there. Should we sue the mall for its role in the situation?
Yes, we should. I believe the legal 'principle' involved means going after the party with the largest bank balance, on the grounds that it's easier for them to pay you to go away; see SCO vs IBM, or countless dubious patent infringement lawsuits.
This is why tables were popularized in the first place. The lay-person who just wanted to throw up a personal web page had neither the time, nor the inclination to learn CSS, so they resorted to the easiest possible manner of positioning things the way they wanted: tables.
When tables were popularised in the first place, Netscape 4 ruled the web. Have you ever tried to use its CSS support?
They aren't being very independent in thought if they are just slavishly following the market, though. These hacks may as well be working for the major corporations as far as consumers are concerned, as it's just more crappy thoughtless slush in the marketplace -- the only link in the chain missing is the corporate paycheck.
Yeah, but there's not much "indie" about letting major corporations do your design work and release a first implementation to test the market for you.
Ever read Foucault's Pendulum?
This is a great design for a textbook, but it's no good in the real world. What happens when you want to make use of your network card's TCP offload engine?
Maybe we need to start redesigning our hardware as well?
Assuming Sony don't pull a Vista with the PS3 ship date, of course.
I'd hit it.
Help! I can't understand why 'apt-get install Half-Life_2' isn't working!
I blame Steam.
The sequel to Evil Genius, maybe?
Nixon brought most of that erosion on, and you can hardly claim that it wasn't justified.
Actually, it was more of a comment on the UK's slow decline into fascism (i.e. executive government, run mainly for the benefit of the major corporations, with none of the checks and balances that a liberal democracy usually has).
Why stop with just one branch of government, if we're planning demolitions?
Yes, let's get rid of that pesky bureaucracy.
Guy Fawkes, where are you now that your country needs you?
It's a long time since the ALP has stood for anything but privatising government assets and lowering tax rates for the rich.
You don't need to spend your time or money defending your bosses. They have enough resources to do it for themselves -- by force if needs be.
We need to respect that.
... and if doing so can help make our billionaires even richer, well, it'd be downright unpatriotic to object.
After all, schools and universities never employ people. No, it's all volunteer labour.
Sorry, that's not "fun fun fun" it's vandalism.
You must have missed the memo.
These days we call it "economic terrorism". (Because anything that the property-owning classes don't like must be demonised.)
may I suggest that you continue publishing stories about "Lesbian Vicars" for those knucklescrapers who continue to find amusement for their unicellular brains in your newspaper
/. tags for this story read "die, murdoch, media" at the moment -- I couldn't have put it better myself :)
If it keeps making money, I'm sure he'll have no problem doing so. But if those numbskulls prefer to receive video-chat invitations from the same 'lesbian vicars' on their 3G mobiles at 5 quid/minute, Rupert wants his minions to be able to sniff out that opportunity, exploit it and (preferably) monopolise it.
(I quite like that the
45 minutes of advertisements, the resumption of advertisements in the middle of movies
Don't forget product placement inside the movies themselves.
NES/SMS I'd consider 1st
What about Atari 2600/Intellivision etc. Zeroth?
Can we call this desserting, then? :)
HB:HG is best read as fiction, though (and the claim to fact is just part of that fiction). In every chapter they postulate certain events with "Wouldn't it be amazing if..." and "Well, these two people may have met once so they were obviously colluding for thirty years". By the next chapter anything advanced in the previous one is accepted as gospel truth (pardon the pun). Also, Pierre Plantard has been unmasked as a hoaxer for many years now, since before they wrote their books IIRC.
From what I've read of DVC, anyway, Brown is a hack of the worst kind and couldn't even be bothered disguising or embelleshing his appropriations. Even if money talks and he wins this case, it won't make him a good writer -- just a rich and successful one. Maybe his next victims will be luckier.
Even if they did manage to gain an effective monopoly (e.g. 90% plus) of online delivery of corporate media content, that's not necessarily illegal. What would be illegal would be unfairly using their position to maintain or extend the monopoly... which would mean they'd need to be transparent and careful in their pricing, corporate actions, etc. if they ever got that far.
It's unlikely to happen, anyway -- if Apple says to, e.g., Sony or Warner, "My way or the highway", those companies are big enough to build their own road system in preference to travelling on Apple's. Also, Sony, Warner et. al. would always be keeping alternative means of online distribution on the back burner in case of any legal/technical/financial problems with their relationships with Apple.
Only if they abuse the monopoly, or have gained it through illegal means.