...is that for services like FreeDrive and MP3.com, you have no option to subscribe to their junk mails, as long as you're using their service. Yes, their e-mails have a clause that says "You are receiving this e-mail because you are using our service".
In other words, as long as you get to use their service, they believe they have every right to spam you to oblivion.
Which is why I think everyone should (or I think most people already do) have a hotmail or yahoo account that is used only for services that require a e-mail registration, so it doesn't clutter up my regular account.
No. That AND the fact you make ridiculous excuses for Daikatana's inferior quality makes me suspicious of you being an Ion Storm employee.
The controls feel fine to me, not sluggish at all. Dark levels... is that new? At any rate, I don't care much about technology (my computer can't run most of the latest technology without low detail and stuff like that), so I guess I'm the lone voice that cares about gameplay.
If you care about gameplay, then you wouldn't be play Daikatana. Like I said, there are numerous websites with people screaming and bitching over the demo release. If I were a good Ion Storm employee like you, I would go defend my main forte, the Ion Storm Bulletin Board, where Daikatana is being slammed like crazy.
We'll see what happens when the game hits the stores.
I expected a game that's at least comparable to the better games of yesteryear, like Half-Life and UT, given the amount of hype Romero has been spinning.
maps were butt-ugly compared to all the recent games that are out. No one is going to buy the game out of sympathy that it's a Quake 2 engine. Hell, no one is going to believe that Soldier of Fortune and Daikatana shared the same engine.
Good for you if you had a lot of fun. But judging from comments from Blues News, Shuga Shack, Slashdot, and even ionstorm's Message Board, everyone hates this game.
For 3dfx AMD K-6 3dNow! users, go into your config.cfg and daikatana.cfg files and change the line that says 'set gl_driver "opengl"' to 'set gl_driver "amd3dgl"'. You'll get DAMN GOOD performance. The game is running sweet here with a VooDoo 2 and AMD K6-2 450. Users without AMD, but with 3dfx chipsets, might want to use 'set gl_driver "3dfxgl"'.
Ion Storm employee? Suspicious I would say, considering that you know so much about the demo the day it's released, and you're the lone voice defending this horrible excuse of 3 year's work.
I'm not talking about getting killed, I'm talking about the technology. It's horribly pathetic and ugly, especially compared to other Quake2 games like Soldier of Fortune, which has been in development for a much shorter time. The controls in the game are very sluggish, and overall the first few levels are very dark and murky, probably meant to cover up the lack of polygons gone into the levels.
I guess Eidos would have canned this game, if they haven't already poured in millions in Daikatana. Not that they are going to recoup much from an actual release though.
How is creating their own database from scratch a "time-saving solution"?
I don't know what webpage you're on, but when I accessed it, it looked fine to me. Spending X amount of time and effort to get a server that fails 1% of the time sure beats spending 10X amount of time and effort to get a server that fails 0% of the time. Especially since it's not mission-critical.
I'm sure hosts of a world famous programming competition would want to waste time and resources to write its own database software and reinvent. Maybe it's a foreign concept to some of you guys that sometimes the most practical, most time-saving solutions is the best one, even if it's not "the right thing".
I already have a patent of selling patents on the internet. In fact, in my patent the place of exchange is called "The Patent & License Exchange". I guess I'll just have to put the patent up on the violator's website and see how much bid they'll put on it. Now that's meta-patent-selling-patent biatch!
Anyone care to run checks on more of Microsoft's DLLs? I'm inclined to think that this isn't the only cleartext backdoor in Windows.
No wonder MS doesn't want DOJ to open-source Windows. It would take them years to clear out all the inside-jokes, bad hacks, broken code, and cleartext backdoors. Yeesh.
But I'm increasingly disgusted at the number of "Ask Slashdot" threads that are students asking Slashdot to do the research for them. Since this is a college prep paper, shouldn't Slashdot be admitted intsead of the student?
Your paper should be your own work, and yes, that includes searching libraries and internet for papers that are relevant for the topic. The ability to read books and research journals, and to utilize the important and interesting ones is one of the factors colleges look for when reading your paper. Leveraging hundreds or thousands of people to do your research for you is ridiculous and immoral.
Yes it does matter. The difference is that we finally have a truly free and open standard for digitally compressed audio. The difference is that we finally have a choice, should Fraunhofer come tumbling down on us with more of their patent hassles.
It's almost like Linux. At some point a few years ago, we thought the world would end, and everyone would be using Windows. Somewhere, an open-source kernel was maturing and emerging to be a tour de force. Microsoft thought it didn't matter, becaus e they had 90% of the market, and all the other Unices were dying in their own little corner. But Linux provided a choice for us. Ogg will be similar in many aspects. It will continue to improve, unlike mp3, and there will be no commercial entities withholding us with watermarks and encryption.
I know that it's the hip thing around here to slam on Katz no matter what he says
I know it's getting hippier to defend JonKatz whenever someone slams on him.
What I didn't get into was that Katz's whole idea was wrong. The so-called technological movements and evolutions aren't even technological movements and evolutions of the nineties.
open source - huh what? Can you see Katz grin to the zealots' clapping of their hands? How does "dominating open source" create a extremely profitable model? AFAIK, open source hasn't even been proven as a viable model of commerce yet. The fastest companies adopting open-source are hardware companies that open-source their driver, because they don't sell software as their main source of business.
nano-technology: your quote: nanotech, once it gets going, will need software in order to do anything worthwhile
Err, yeah. Now can you elaborate on how Microsoft creating software for nanotech will be a profitable and lucrative business?
AI is classically a matter of software + specialized hardware
I agree with your statement. But how is not dominating AI bad for Microsoft? Sorry.
SuperComps and handhelds are light-blinkers without an OS and proggies.
Can you explain how selling OSes for super computers will generate a lot of revenue? Please?
I'm not even going to touch genetic research with a 10 foot pole.
Katz's only valid points was hand-held and wireless computing - even wireless computing is better left to the hardware companies.
So, 1 out of 7 right isn't too bad?
And Katz missed the most important 2 techlogical evolutions that Microsoft didn't ride - Internet and e-commerce. Which lead me to the conclusion that Katz doesn't know what he's talking about.
It seemed pooped and lame. Bill Gates' company hasn't dominated any of the significant technological movements and evolutions of the late 90s: open source, nano-technology, AI, genetic research, hand-held and wireless computing, supercomputers.
Your fallacy seems to assume that Bill Gates is trying to build an empire of everything technological. However, Microsoft has remained to be a primarily software company ever since its inception, and I don't see why a software company needs to dominate nano-technology, supercomputers, or genetic research to be rake in cash from an operating system used in most personal computers in the world.
Actually, why on earth would a software company want to dominate in any of those mentioned fields?
Let me go sell my amazon stocks now, since I don't think they'll plan on doing anything nanotech with their books and DVDs anytime in the near future.
Check out Microsoft and the Freedom to Innovate I don't think it was just put up today, But it was certainly the biggest joke I've seen today! *grin*.
I agree, 'Netscape' is getting old...
on
Netscape 6
·
· Score: 1
but so is 'Microsoft'.
I propose that we start calling Microsoft with a more colorful name, like MonopolisticSonsOfBitches.
Remember that name. Use it when you talk to people. Eventually, they won't know you replaced it.
From http://www.MonopolisticSonsOfBitches.com/mscorp/
About MonopolisticSonsOfBitches
Since its inception in 1975, MonopolisticSonsOfBitches's mission has been to create software for the personal computer that empowers and enriches people in the workplace, at school and at home. MonopolisticSonsOfBitches's early vision of a computer on every desk and in every home is coupled today with a strong commitment to Internet-related technologies that expand the power and reach of the PC and its users.
As the world's leading software provider, MonopolisticSonsOfBitches strives to produce innovative products that meet our customers' evolving needs. At the same time, we understand that long-term success is about more than just making great products. Find out what we mean when we talk about Living Our Values.
Corporate headquarters: One MonopolisticSonsOfBitches Way Redmond, WA 98052-6399 Telephone: (425) 882-8080
2000 MonopolisticSonsOfBitches Corporation. All rights reserved. Terms of Use.
but the author (an editor at Rolling Stone, which to the music establishment is what the WSJ is to the business world) apparently couldn't find any well-known, big-selling names to support his argument.
Why should they? we know that the big-name artists aren't the victims in Salon's article. We know that MP3 leeching (as of now) doesn't put a dent in big-selling name artists. Why do we need Britney Spears to tell us that she doesn't like Napster? She has better money-making things to do with her time.
It's the less popular artists that are getting screwed - the ones that are praying on the sales figure of their next record so they won't lose the next contract. The ones that won't have a big enough audience to do a country-wide tour, and having mp3 eating into their profits.
I'm appalled at how many bigotted comments there are in this thread, those who think this is more of RIAA propaganda, even when they have a plethora of artists telling you how much they hate Napster. Even more appalled is how many of these bigotted comments are getting moderated up. so much for "insightful."
Ok, an artist releases an album. A track or two become "popular", and get airplay on MTV and pop radio (not college radio...). People follow the leader and totally dig this artist. CDs are bought in droves. Some people decide to rip mp3s off of this CD and distribute them on Usenet, IRC, Napster, ad nauseum. This artist, feeling her/his oats off of good CD sales and excellent radio play, decides to tour. People at the tour stops buy shirts, CDs, etc. And she/he is *losing* money due to mp3s? Give me a fscking break. I grok that the artists worried about Napster, et al, are just worried that they won't become mega-millionaires like U2 or Rolling Stones. Screw them.
Dude, where's your record label? or your money-making band? "Screw them?" Did you even read the article? You're either a troll or a very ignorant person, because you're exactly the stereotypical freeloaders they described in the Salon article.
Notice that he said Ivy League education, not Ivy League college experience.
That means this e-college will have professors that care more about research than their classes, have grading curves that are lax enough to keep the athletes and the alumni's kids from failing, and TAs (who will suck) that will be teaching most of the classes.
[TA] So.. umm.. umm.. the equation.. umm.. [Student214] Speak louder! *TA is too shy and hides in corner [Student788] Can't hear you! [Student112] Dude, this university sucks ass!
Slashdot Mirror
abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz0123456789
that's 36 right there - what's the problem?
In other words, as long as you get to use their service, they believe they have every right to spam you to oblivion.
Which is why I think everyone should (or I think most people already do) have a hotmail or yahoo account that is used only for services that require a e-mail registration, so it doesn't clutter up my regular account.
No. That AND the fact you make ridiculous excuses for Daikatana's inferior quality makes me suspicious of you being an Ion Storm employee.
The controls feel fine to me, not sluggish at all. Dark levels... is that new? At any rate, I don't care much about technology (my computer can't run most of the latest technology without low detail and stuff like that), so I guess I'm the lone voice that cares about gameplay.
If you care about gameplay, then you wouldn't be play Daikatana. Like I said, there are numerous websites with people screaming and bitching over the demo release. If I were a good Ion Storm employee like you, I would go defend my main forte, the Ion Storm Bulletin Board, where Daikatana is being slammed like crazy.
We'll see what happens when the game hits the stores.
Will you be fired from Ion Storm by then?
I expected a game that's at least comparable to the better games of yesteryear, like Half-Life and UT, given the amount of hype Romero has been spinning.
maps were butt-ugly compared to all the recent games that are out. No one is going to buy the game out of sympathy that it's a Quake 2 engine. Hell, no one is going to believe that Soldier of Fortune and Daikatana shared the same engine.
Good for you if you had a lot of fun. But judging from comments from Blues News, Shuga Shack, Slashdot, and even ionstorm's Message Board, everyone hates this game.
Ion Storm employee? Suspicious I would say, considering that you know so much about the demo the day it's released, and you're the lone voice defending this horrible excuse of 3 year's work.
I'm not talking about getting killed, I'm talking about the technology. It's horribly pathetic and ugly, especially compared to other Quake2 games like Soldier of Fortune, which has been in development for a much shorter time. The controls in the game are very sluggish, and overall the first few levels are very dark and murky, probably meant to cover up the lack of polygons gone into the levels.
I guess Eidos would have canned this game, if they haven't already poured in millions in Daikatana. Not that they are going to recoup much from an actual release though.
R.I.P., Daikatana.
I don't know what webpage you're on, but when I accessed it, it looked fine to me. Spending X amount of time and effort to get a server that fails 1% of the time sure beats spending 10X amount of time and effort to get a server that fails 0% of the time. Especially since it's not mission-critical.
Frac
nobody said Toshiba invented watercooling. And not many people in this country consider audio amps a "laptop".
I'm sure hosts of a world famous programming competition would want to waste time and resources to write its own database software and reinvent. Maybe it's a foreign concept to some of you guys that sometimes the most practical, most time-saving solutions is the best one, even if it's not "the right thing".
Microsoft apparently got "Netscape engineers are weenies!" backwards as well...
I already have a patent of selling patents on the internet. In fact, in my patent the place of exchange is called "The Patent & License Exchange". I guess I'll just have to put the patent up on the violator's website and see how much bid they'll put on it. Now that's meta-patent-selling-patent biatch!
Otherwise, give us proof that this BS is actually part of the letter, and not part of damage control.
No wonder MS doesn't want DOJ to open-source Windows. It would take them years to clear out all the inside-jokes, bad hacks, broken code, and cleartext backdoors. Yeesh.
Your paper should be your own work, and yes, that includes searching libraries and internet for papers that are relevant for the topic. The ability to read books and research journals, and to utilize the important and interesting ones is one of the factors colleges look for when reading your paper. Leveraging hundreds or thousands of people to do your research for you is ridiculous and immoral.
by 2050, nutritional patches will be the new fad for girls trying to lose weight.
by 2060, dilberito finally goes out of business. Scott Adams doesnt' really care, because he's having too much fun inside the holodeck.
Yes it does matter. The difference is that we finally have a truly free and open standard for digitally compressed audio. The difference is that we finally have a choice, should Fraunhofer come tumbling down on us with more of their patent hassles.
It's almost like Linux. At some point a few years ago, we thought the world would end, and everyone would be using Windows. Somewhere, an open-source kernel was maturing and emerging to be a tour de force. Microsoft thought it didn't matter, becaus e they had 90% of the market, and all the other Unices were dying in their own little corner. But Linux provided a choice for us. Ogg will be similar in many aspects. It will continue to improve, unlike mp3, and there will be no commercial entities withholding us with watermarks and encryption.
The small download only includes the setup.exe file. The rest of the files are downloaded from netscape's FTP site.
From the looks of mozilla, the total amount to download should be around 6mb.
PS While they're at it, can we do something about that annoying SmartDownload program that shows banners?
I know it's getting hippier to defend JonKatz whenever someone slams on him.
What I didn't get into was that Katz's whole idea was wrong. The so-called technological movements and evolutions aren't even technological movements and evolutions of the nineties.
open source - huh what? Can you see Katz grin to the zealots' clapping of their hands? How does "dominating open source" create a extremely profitable model? AFAIK, open source hasn't even been proven as a viable model of commerce yet. The fastest companies adopting open-source are hardware companies that open-source their driver, because they don't sell software as their main source of business.
nano-technology: your quote: nanotech, once it gets going, will need software in order to do anything worthwhile
Err, yeah. Now can you elaborate on how Microsoft creating software for nanotech will be a profitable and lucrative business?
AI is classically a matter of software + specialized hardware
I agree with your statement. But how is not dominating AI bad for Microsoft? Sorry.
SuperComps and handhelds are light-blinkers without an OS and proggies.
Can you explain how selling OSes for super computers will generate a lot of revenue? Please?
I'm not even going to touch genetic research with a 10 foot pole.
Katz's only valid points was hand-held and wireless computing - even wireless computing is better left to the hardware companies.
So, 1 out of 7 right isn't too bad?
And Katz missed the most important 2 techlogical evolutions that Microsoft didn't ride - Internet and e-commerce. Which lead me to the conclusion that Katz doesn't know what he's talking about.
As for you...
Your fallacy seems to assume that Bill Gates is trying to build an empire of everything technological. However, Microsoft has remained to be a primarily software company ever since its inception, and I don't see why a software company needs to dominate nano-technology, supercomputers, or genetic research to be rake in cash from an operating system used in most personal computers in the world.
Actually, why on earth would a software company want to dominate in any of those mentioned fields?
Let me go sell my amazon stocks now, since I don't think they'll plan on doing anything nanotech with their books and DVDs anytime in the near future.
Check out Microsoft and the Freedom to Innovate I don't think it was just put up today, But it was certainly the biggest joke I've seen today! *grin*.
I propose that we start calling Microsoft with a more colorful name, like MonopolisticSonsOfBitches.
Remember that name. Use it when you talk to people. Eventually, they won't know you replaced it.
From http://www.MonopolisticSonsOfBitches.com/mscorp/
Since its inception in 1975, MonopolisticSonsOfBitches's mission has been to create software for the personal computer that empowers and enriches people in the workplace, at school and at home. MonopolisticSonsOfBitches's early vision of a computer on every desk and in every home is coupled today with a strong commitment to Internet-related technologies that expand the power and reach of the PC and its users.
As the world's leading software provider, MonopolisticSonsOfBitches strives to produce innovative products that meet our customers' evolving needs. At the same time, we understand that long-term success is about more than just making great products. Find out what we mean when we talk about Living Our Values.
Corporate headquarters:
One MonopolisticSonsOfBitches Way
Redmond, WA 98052-6399
Telephone: (425) 882-8080
2000 MonopolisticSonsOfBitches Corporation. All rights reserved. Terms of Use.
Why should they? we know that the big-name artists aren't the victims in Salon's article. We know that MP3 leeching (as of now) doesn't put a dent in big-selling name artists. Why do we need Britney Spears to tell us that she doesn't like Napster? She has better money-making things to do with her time.
It's the less popular artists that are getting screwed - the ones that are praying on the sales figure of their next record so they won't lose the next contract. The ones that won't have a big enough audience to do a country-wide tour, and having mp3 eating into their profits.
I'm appalled at how many bigotted comments there are in this thread, those who think this is more of RIAA propaganda, even when they have a plethora of artists telling you how much they hate Napster. Even more appalled is how many of these bigotted comments are getting moderated up. so much for "insightful."
Ok, an artist releases an album. A track or two become "popular", and get airplay on MTV and pop radio (not college radio...). People follow the leader and totally dig this artist. CDs are bought in droves. Some people decide to rip mp3s off of this CD and distribute them on Usenet, IRC, Napster, ad nauseum. This artist, feeling her/his oats off of good CD sales and excellent radio play, decides to tour. People at the tour stops buy shirts, CDs, etc. And she/he is *losing* money due to mp3s? Give me a fscking break. I grok that the artists worried about Napster, et al, are just worried that they won't become mega-millionaires like U2 or Rolling Stones. Screw them.
Dude, where's your record label? or your money-making band? "Screw them?" Did you even read the article? You're either a troll or a very ignorant person, because you're exactly the stereotypical freeloaders they described in the Salon article.
That means this e-college will have professors that care more about research than their classes, have grading curves that are lax enough to keep the athletes and the alumni's kids from failing, and TAs (who will suck) that will be teaching most of the classes.
[TA] So.. umm.. umm.. the equation.. umm..
[Student214] Speak louder!
*TA is too shy and hides in corner
[Student788] Can't hear you!
[Student112] Dude, this university sucks ass!