And why would you compare it to DVD vs VHS or CD vs tape? Unlike those comparisons, Blu-ray is not a transformational technology relative to DVD. DVDs don't wear out, and an upscaling DVD player produces output that - viewed on a cheap HDTV - isn't that far behind Blu-ray quality for the majority of viewers who are more interested in watching something entertaining than in wanking over the specification of their AV suite.
Yes, yes, I know, Blu-ray is far superior, and if we'd only just buy a $2000 HDTV, adamantium plated HDMI cables, and view it while standing on our heads and licking a irate gecko, we'd see that the quality is obviously better than DVD.
Yes, those Troll raters are total noobs. When I want to punish and suppress anyone that dares to disagree with me, I rate "Redundant", since metamoderators are too lazy to check.
Well, some people confuse rewarding the content creator with rewarding the distributor. It's an easy mistake to make, and one that distributors are keen to encourage.
Yup, NewYorkCountryLawyer is a real expert at calling the shots three days after they've been made. We need a new "IANASL" tag: I Am Not A Significant Lawyer.
If NYCL were a lawyer of substance then he'd be too busy laywering, rather than taking the time (and apparently having the need) to promote himself on Slashdot. Those who can, do. Those who can't, well, they either teach, or focus on their marketing.
Yup. I'm further thinking that since this is such a stupidly trivial attack, that it was all that MS could think to defend against, and that no Apache developer believed that any self respecting attacker would stoop so low.
The best input device I have ever used, bar none, is the Microsoft Trackball Explorer.
It was so good, in fact, that Microsoft - inevitably - stopped selling it, in favour of a crappy unloved cheapo thumb-ball. The proper Explorers now sell on eBay for $150 and up - if you can get one. The ball alone sells for $45. Heheh, balls.
Virtual "+1, Needs to Be Said". When the facts and the law are against you, simply putting your fingers in your ears and shrieking "Didn't, didn't, DIDN'T" is not a defence strategy, it's evidence of insanity.
Also, any ethical lawyer would have looked at the evidence against her, and advised her to settle up front. At this point, her freebie wunderkind is playing a game of "Let's you and him fight". He's the only possible winner here; everybody else loses, no matter what the final verdict.
Well, she's clearly nuttier than a squirrel's 401K for continuing to try the "A wizard did it" defence in the face of overwhelming evidence both of her guilt and her ham fisted attempts to destroy the evidence of it. At this point, bringing Chewbacca into the appeal would actually be dialing down the crazy a notch.
The jury wanted to send the message that she was guilty but wanted to add something to it that might help change the laws.
Well, ain't that noble of them!
After being forced to sit and listen to Jammie's "uh... a wizard did it" defence (redux), is it possible, do you think, that the jury were just royally pissed, and wanted to bitch-slap her less for sharing the files, and more for wasting everyone's time and tax dollars by trying to bullshit them?
Look, she did it. She knows it, the RIAA know it, we know it, "Kiwi" knows it, everybody involved knew it from day 1. The issue is the penalty, not the guilt, but Jammie just can't stop running her mouth off with her ludicrous "Oh no I did-UHNT" assertions.
Perhaps a more penitent tack might be advised for the appeal?
"The state must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people. As long as the government is perceived as working for the benefit of the children, the people will happily endure almost any curtailment of liberty and almost any deprivation"
Well, she's getting what she's paid for: a bunch of young bucks trying to make a name for themselves by shooting for the moon on a big profile case.
Thing is, if they miss, they get to walk away and merely be filthy rich rather than obscenely rich for the rest of their lives. Jammie gets to work as an indentured slave to the RIAA for the rest of hers.
he is trying to explain about the distinction between between running five tasks at once (a classic "threading" model), and splitting one task into five work units.
Well, that's your interpretation. I think he's not trying very hard to explain whatever it is that he's talking about. Long on spin, short on examples.
Indeed, since the media "industry" - the guys that buy the lawyers and Senators - have no interest in "creating" anything. Their job is to exploit other peoples' creations. Whether the creators get rewarded or not is utterly irrelevant to them.
True, but you'd need to put speed bumps just after the vampiric plates to deter acceleration, or else Astra Man will just floor it to get his speed back up.
If you've ever worked with the Evil Poor, the first thing out of their mouth is a denial, even when you're not accusing them of anything. It seems that Jammie here would screech "Oh no you DID-UN'T" (snap, snap) if you so much as asked her the time.
Look, the woman did what the RIAA said she did. She knows it, the RIAA know it, we know it, the lawyers know it, even the judge must be tired of hearing the dissembling by now. At this point it's just turned into a game of who's got the most stamina, and I reckon Jammie and "Kiwi" can spout "Nuh-HUH" from now until Doomsday.
So far, so good, but what if "simplifying" the tax regime means "Oh, but we'd like a flat tax on all cell sales / contracts / minutes / SMSs, since that's simpler than trying to identify and tax personal use of business phones."
If you've got a prosthetic, you've already got enough ability to swing around a wii-mote.
You're dumb, and should stop right here. This is provably untrue.
I was going to ask for your evidence, but I wouldn't want to be accused of being dumb, so I guess you win. Congratulations! What prize would you like? Amused disdain, or open contempt?
I have no idea what you just said, but I have the inexplicable urge to give you a metric shedload of money to produce a document with "synergy" in the title.
Slashdot Mirror
And why would you compare it to DVD vs VHS or CD vs tape? Unlike those comparisons, Blu-ray is not a transformational technology relative to DVD. DVDs don't wear out, and an upscaling DVD player produces output that - viewed on a cheap HDTV - isn't that far behind Blu-ray quality for the majority of viewers who are more interested in watching something entertaining than in wanking over the specification of their AV suite.
Yes, yes, I know, Blu-ray is far superior, and if we'd only just buy a $2000 HDTV, adamantium plated HDMI cables, and view it while standing on our heads and licking a irate gecko, we'd see that the quality is obviously better than DVD.
Do you see a distinction between contains and "is full of"?
Yes, those Troll raters are total noobs. When I want to punish and suppress anyone that dares to disagree with me, I rate "Redundant", since metamoderators are too lazy to check.
Well, some people confuse rewarding the content creator with rewarding the distributor. It's an easy mistake to make, and one that distributors are keen to encourage.
Yup, NewYorkCountryLawyer is a real expert at calling the shots three days after they've been made. We need a new "IANASL" tag: I Am Not A Significant Lawyer.
If NYCL were a lawyer of substance then he'd be too busy laywering, rather than taking the time (and apparently having the need) to promote himself on Slashdot. Those who can, do. Those who can't, well, they either teach, or focus on their marketing.
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
If the units are moving off the shelves, then they don't "need" to do anything. Here's the pictorial explanation.
What, like Gallifreyans?
Yup. I'm further thinking that since this is such a stupidly trivial attack, that it was all that MS could think to defend against, and that no Apache developer believed that any self respecting attacker would stoop so low.
And you get raped again as soon as it comes back up. How does restarting it help?
It's just holding sockets open; that's the "Hello, world!" of DOS attacks.
I'm finding it hard to believe that Apache is genuinely vulnerable to this. Did nobody see it coming? For real?
I heard they're also really into kiddie snuff porn.
I mean, on principle. Sure, on principle.
The best input device I have ever used, bar none, is the Microsoft Trackball Explorer.
It was so good, in fact, that Microsoft - inevitably - stopped selling it, in favour of a crappy unloved cheapo thumb-ball. The proper Explorers now sell on eBay for $150 and up - if you can get one. The ball alone sells for $45. Heheh, balls.
Virtual "+1, Needs to Be Said". When the facts and the law are against you, simply putting your fingers in your ears and shrieking "Didn't, didn't, DIDN'T" is not a defence strategy, it's evidence of insanity.
Also, any ethical lawyer would have looked at the evidence against her, and advised her to settle up front. At this point, her freebie wunderkind is playing a game of "Let's you and him fight". He's the only possible winner here; everybody else loses, no matter what the final verdict.
Well, she's clearly nuttier than a squirrel's 401K for continuing to try the "A wizard did it" defence in the face of overwhelming evidence both of her guilt and her ham fisted attempts to destroy the evidence of it. At this point, bringing Chewbacca into the appeal would actually be dialing down the crazy a notch.
Well, ain't that noble of them!
After being forced to sit and listen to Jammie's "uh... a wizard did it" defence (redux), is it possible, do you think, that the jury were just royally pissed, and wanted to bitch-slap her less for sharing the files, and more for wasting everyone's time and tax dollars by trying to bullshit them?
Look, she did it. She knows it, the RIAA know it, we know it, "Kiwi" knows it, everybody involved knew it from day 1. The issue is the penalty, not the guilt, but Jammie just can't stop running her mouth off with her ludicrous "Oh no I did-UHNT" assertions.
Perhaps a more penitent tack might be advised for the appeal?
Oscar Wilde? No, sounds more like Mae West.
Well, she's getting what she's paid for: a bunch of young bucks trying to make a name for themselves by shooting for the moon on a big profile case.
Thing is, if they miss, they get to walk away and merely be filthy rich rather than obscenely rich for the rest of their lives. Jammie gets to work as an indentured slave to the RIAA for the rest of hers.
Well, that's your interpretation. I think he's not trying very hard to explain whatever it is that he's talking about. Long on spin, short on examples.
Indeed, since the media "industry" - the guys that buy the lawyers and Senators - have no interest in "creating" anything. Their job is to exploit other peoples' creations. Whether the creators get rewarded or not is utterly irrelevant to them.
True, but you'd need to put speed bumps just after the vampiric plates to deter acceleration, or else Astra Man will just floor it to get his speed back up.
If you've ever worked with the Evil Poor, the first thing out of their mouth is a denial, even when you're not accusing them of anything. It seems that Jammie here would screech "Oh no you DID-UN'T" (snap, snap) if you so much as asked her the time.
Look, the woman did what the RIAA said she did. She knows it, the RIAA know it, we know it, the lawyers know it, even the judge must be tired of hearing the dissembling by now. At this point it's just turned into a game of who's got the most stamina, and I reckon Jammie and "Kiwi" can spout "Nuh-HUH" from now until Doomsday.
They (apparently) want to get rid of this tax.
So far, so good, but what if "simplifying" the tax regime means "Oh, but we'd like a flat tax on all cell sales / contracts / minutes / SMSs, since that's simpler than trying to identify and tax personal use of business phones."
Post that here, got modded +1 Insightful. Post that in South Korea, get modded +1 Funny.
I was going to ask for your evidence, but I wouldn't want to be accused of being dumb, so I guess you win. Congratulations! What prize would you like? Amused disdain, or open contempt?
I have no idea what you just said, but I have the inexplicable urge to give you a metric shedload of money to produce a document with "synergy" in the title.