No one is claiming ownership of the laptop, but the real problem is this next bit:
This company has every right to do whatever the hell they want with it.
Pants-on-head crazy. If you rent/lease an apartment, can your landlord take a shower at night in your bathroom? Can he watch you while you sleep? It's not just creepy-wrong, it's illegal.
Don't like it? Tough. Either go buy a laptop, which makes it yours, or find a way to disable the program, which no doubt is against the rental agreement.
Contract law can be a complicated thing, but here's something to know: if a person tells you to do something illegal, in a contract that you sign, you don't have to do the illegal thing. If a person says that they're going to do something illegal, and you sign the contract, that doesn't absolve them of wrongdoing.
(This is not legal advice, I am not your lawyer, etc)
To quote the person you're responding to (Moryath):
Remember the "your right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins" idea the Republicunts keep screaming about when they want "freedom"? Well, your right to smoke ends when you blow it in my face, asswad.
Are you suggesting that marijuana users are lobbying for it to be smokable everywhere cigarettes are/were? I find that they mostly want to smoke at home or around other smokers and NOT GO TO JAIL FOR IT.
It's funny (to me) that you say this because I recently watched a video that told me money isn't a motivator. I'm sure it's someone trying to pitch their ideology on me. I don't know about you, but I'll gladly take a raise. I have a house to buy and I don't want to go "cheap."
You should watch that video again because you missed the interesting part:
If you don't pay people enough money, they won't be motivated. The best use of money as a motivator is to pay people enough to take the issue of money off the table. Pay people enough so that they're not thinking about the money, they're thinking about the work
In other news: FOX News is not exceptionally biased toward the politically conservative.
To be clear: I would say that 300 is about as historically accurate as FOX News is "Fair and Balanced". That is to say: It's true, on occasion, but it's far outweighed by all the times it's not.
The movie 300 wasn't based on history, it needn't be historically accurate. It's a movie from a comic book called 300, by Frank Miller. This comic isn't a historical documentary either; it's a work of fiction to be read primarily for entertainment (imho).
The movie 300 is very faithful to the book it came from, and so is an accurate rendering of it.
In short the two questions at hand are:
What was the film portraying?
How well was the portrayal; how accurate was it to its' base material?
For 300, the film portrayed the comic book (not history), and did a good job of it. The Sin City film adaptation was also accurate in this respect; you can open the comic and see the panels shot on the screen. For FOX, you'd need to answer these same questions... what is it trying to show, and is it giving you an accurate rendition of that? Personally I prefer "journalists" and "reporters" to "news commentators", but you shouldn't listen to anyone without using the old critical thinking...
I clicked your link from your previous post, had a quick read of the Mana series wiki; that, together with the ideas you espouse of single-box multiplay on a large screen suggest that you want Diablo 3 to be a console release. After all, a console is a computer purpose-built for gaming, connected to the TV (usually), and with controllers for multiple simultaneous players.
How can you encourage cooperative gameplay if the players who want to cooperate live together?
Any time I've ever lived with people who game, all of us had their own PCs. Network them together and off you go.
PS: Some friends bought Kane & Lynch for the PC and were shocked to discover that cooperative multiplayer was not available by using 2 PCs; you had to both huddle over 1 PC with a split screen, one player using an XBox gamepad. For this reason I won't trust any title with the "Games for Windows" MicroSoft tag...
The difference between a terrorist and a freedom fighter is just that the latter won his war. This is a popular misconception. The freedom fighter does not battle against civilians of the enemy state; that is an act of the terrorist.
It is unfortunate that truth is so wordy, and falsity so slick.
And the response from free-marketeers: start your own ISP, provide the services that you want, and watch the money roll in!
This of course ignores the reality of barriers to entry, both on the business side (in the way of fees required to operate, etc), and on the personal side (I'd rather not quit my job in order to be an ISP startup, just because Comcast is awful).
I can't help but think of all of those poor buggy whip manufacturers who had their jobs eliminated when the automobile was first introduced. We should ban it.. oh wait...
Did I miss the part where buggy whip manufacturers in the US went under due to globalization moving production overseas?
The buggy went away because automobiles replaced them, which gave buggy whip manufacturers something else to make. So I have no problem with new tech replacing older tech, there's still work for people to do. However, sending the current tech work offshore does not create new opportunities for the locals. I perceive this as a problem.
That being said, my only goal in this post was to highlight the difference between technologies becoming obsolete (and replaced by a newer technology) versus technologies (at least, their production) being shipped out of a given country.
No, they need to verbize another noun when there was a perfectly good word in the language that means *exactly* what they want. feh.
I disagree. My understanding is that a person might be motivated by carrot (something good that you want), stick (something negative that you want to avoid), or a combination of these. To incentivize is to motivate with the carrot alone and NOT the stick.
Very different in my opinion, but I work in an office and maybe my brain just works that way now:(
And I find that attitude very strange. I find advertisements almost universally offensive. If I want to buy something, I will do my own research.. preferably from unbiased sources. That's fair; personally I find many commercials funny, or striking in some way. I don't use a commercial to tell me what to buy or how to live; it's a 30 second clip which might amuse or entertain. And those, I like to see and share with friends.
I don't give a crap what Tivo does because I will continue to use open source solutions such as MythTV which are not beholden in any way to the whims of advertisers and broadcasters (barring draconian legislation and enforcement, of course). I think your point of view is extreme, but that is your right. In a sense, all of broadcast television is beholden in some way(s) to the whims of advertisers and/or broadcasters. To truly be free of that you'd need to shun all broadcast media. Personally, I'm not willing to do that. I have 2 DirecTivo's that give me what I want from broadcast TV: timeshifting, buffering, subscription, and favorites.
Meaningless PR babble as far as I am concerned. The proof is in the pudding, as they say. The article links back to a story where there's a better description of what's been launched... Sure, anything can change in the unknown future, but I'd say there is some pudding. And to me it looks delicious. Link
I really wish this one detail was in the summary: Tivo is not talking about forcing you to watch commercials. They are talking about targeted opt-in advertising FROM THE TIVO MENU. So you have to specifically go there to watch them, they will not just pop in during your TV stream.
From the article:
'"The consumer is in charge and we need to respect that," said Kent. "Our consumer satisfaction rate is very high and if you respect that and remember that they're the ones who decide, not the networks, not the advertiser and not us, TiVo, then they actually will interact with your advertising on their own time."
What I really like about Kent's statement is that it emphasizes TiVo's use of opt in advertising. If you don't want to interact with the ads, you don't have too. It's up to the advertisers to give you a reason to be there.'
'"The consumer is in charge and we need to respect that," said Kent. "Our consumer satisfaction rate is very high and if you respect that and remember that they're the ones who decide, not the networks, not the advertiser and not us, TiVo, then they actually will interact with your advertising on their own time."
What I really like about Kent's statement is that it emphasizes TiVo's use of opt in advertising. If you don't want to interact with the ads, you don't have too. It's up to the advertisers to give you a reason to be there.'
Tivo is not forcing you to watch commercials during your show. This is about the longer advertisements which are accessible from the Tivo menu. YOU HAVE TO CHOOSE TO GO WATCH THE COMMERCIAL. I just wanted to clear that up for everyone talking about how they watch "live TV" about 20 minutes delayed to skip the commercials. The article is not about that, Tivo's business model is not changing to be about that. This is about opt-in commercials from the Tivo menu.
With that out of the way, I personally would like to subscribe, or somehow express interest in, regular commercials. I would like them saved in the same way as the longer ads, ie in the Tivo menu. So when I see a high-quality commercial that I want to show my friends, I don't have to record several shows hoping to catch it, I can just request it.
That's not my assertion at all. Here's the statement in question:
IMHO the LSB only has as much value as you place in the linux kernel gaining popularity on the desktop. If that's not a concern for you then the LSB has no value.
Restated: My opinion is that the LSB will help the linux kernel gain popularity on the desktop.
I agree with your statement that the LSB is not required for wdespread adoption of Linux on the desktop. But I also feel that the fragmentary nature of linux distros will slow this widespread adoption, and I feel that the LSB speaks to that and mitigates the "problem" somewhat.
Again, many (most?) hardcore linux users could care less if there were widespread adoption of linux on the desktop. Personally I'd like to see more of it, and the LSB (or something like it, with a well thought-out and well-executed test suite) would help with that.
I agree with the grandparent here; the testing suite having bugs SAYS NOTHING about whether the LSB should exist in the first place. It only says that the suite needs better oversight, code review, something.
IMHO the LSB only has as much value as you place in the linux kernel gaining popularity on the desktop. If that's not a concern for you then the LSB has no value. I'd personally like to see more Linux installs on desktops.
Envy went into the VisualAge series. Note that Eclipse is NOT the latest version of VisualAge; Eclipse doesn't use the envy repository (it uses CVS instead).
I've used both, and I much prefer VisualAge. The IDE is bound to the JVM (bad), but the environment allows you to work in an object-oriented way; I can pull out a class and work with it. I can pull out a method and look at that. In Eclipse, everything is file-based; to work with a method, the IDE just scrolls to the right place in the text file:(
Also, the VisualAge debugger was 1000X better than Eclipse. Try step-through debugging with both. Try dropping to a selected frame in the execution stack rather than restarting your app from the beginning.
Just wanted to clarify that Ecipse isn't really the next iteration of VisualAge; it's a replacement product which is getting better every release.
What model do you suggest to replace the "multi-layered managerial system"? At large companies like Ford, I think that it's not a question of not wanting to dirty one's hands, but how does a CEO run a company with a few hundred thousand employees in a flat managerial hierarchy? Those management levels are in place not because he doesn't want to get in the "trenches", but because there aren't enough hours in the day.
A CEO (or whatever you call the top person) must trust the lower level managers; the alternatives are micromanagement of each tier, or fire all managers and have EVERYONE report directly to the top person.
Now, highly paid executives probably DON'T want to get their hands dirty, but that doesn't mean they are shirking responsibility. Again, flatter hierarchies can work, depending on the size of the corporation, but what do you do for the really huge ones?
Slashdot Mirror
Just don't be this guy: https://xkcd.com/606/
Because I want the underlying OS available at the same time for music playing, or web browsing, or any number of tasks I have my computer working on.
I'm going to get hated on for this,
Yes, and deservedly so.
but if you're renting a laptop. it's not yours.
No one is claiming ownership of the laptop, but the real problem is this next bit:
This company has every right to do whatever the hell they want with it.
Pants-on-head crazy. If you rent/lease an apartment, can your landlord take a shower at night in your bathroom? Can he watch you while you sleep? It's not just creepy-wrong, it's illegal.
Don't like it? Tough. Either go buy a laptop, which makes it yours, or find a way to disable the program, which no doubt is against the rental agreement.
Contract law can be a complicated thing, but here's something to know: if a person tells you to do something illegal, in a contract that you sign,
you don't have to do the illegal thing. If a person says that they're going to do something illegal, and you sign the contract, that doesn't absolve them of wrongdoing.
(This is not legal advice, I am not your lawyer, etc)
To quote the person you're responding to (Moryath):
Remember the "your right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins" idea the Republicunts keep screaming about when they want "freedom"? Well, your right to smoke ends when you blow it in my face, asswad.
Are you suggesting that marijuana users are lobbying for it to be smokable everywhere cigarettes are/were? I find that they mostly want to smoke at home or around other smokers and NOT GO TO JAIL FOR IT.
Maybe you missed the acronym GSM there. Or are there scads of smaller GSM providers in the US?
It's funny (to me) that you say this because I recently watched a video that told me money isn't a motivator. I'm sure it's someone trying to pitch their ideology on me. I don't know about you, but I'll gladly take a raise. I have a house to buy and I don't want to go "cheap."
You should watch that video again because you missed the interesting part:
If you don't pay people enough money, they won't be motivated. The best use of money as a motivator is to pay people enough to take the issue of money off the table. Pay people enough so that they're not thinking about the money, they're thinking about the work
(mostly quoted from the linked video)
Didn't we see this already when the country Tuvalu and Verisign got together to sell *.tv domain names?
There was a pile of hype at the time but not much came of it.
The movie 300 wasn't based on history, it needn't be historically accurate. It's a movie from a comic book called 300, by Frank Miller. This comic isn't a historical documentary either; it's a work of fiction to be read primarily for entertainment (imho).
The movie 300 is very faithful to the book it came from, and so is an accurate rendering of it.
In short the two questions at hand are:
What was the film portraying?
How well was the portrayal; how accurate was it to its' base material?
For 300, the film portrayed the comic book (not history), and did a good job of it. The Sin City film adaptation was also accurate in this respect; you can open the comic and see the panels shot on the screen. For FOX, you'd need to answer these same questions... what is it trying to show, and is it giving you an accurate rendition of that? Personally I prefer "journalists" and "reporters" to "news commentators", but you shouldn't listen to anyone without using the old critical thinking...
I clicked your link from your previous post, had a quick read of the Mana series wiki; that, together with the ideas you espouse of single-box multiplay on a large screen suggest that you want Diablo 3 to be a console release. After all, a console is a computer purpose-built for gaming, connected to the TV (usually), and with controllers for multiple simultaneous players.
So are you wanting it to be a console release?
How can you encourage cooperative gameplay if the players who want to cooperate live together?
Any time I've ever lived with people who game, all of us had their own PCs. Network them together and off you go.
PS: Some friends bought Kane & Lynch for the PC and were shocked to discover that cooperative multiplayer was not available by using 2 PCs; you had to both huddle over 1 PC with a split screen, one player using an XBox gamepad. For this reason I won't trust any title with the "Games for Windows" MicroSoft tag...
It is unfortunate that truth is so wordy, and falsity so slick.
And the response from free-marketeers: start your own ISP, provide the services that you want, and watch the money roll in!
This of course ignores the reality of barriers to entry, both on the business side (in the way of fees required to operate, etc), and on the personal side (I'd rather not quit my job in order to be an ISP startup, just because Comcast is awful).
And don't forget the next line:
"It starts when you're always afraid"
I can't help but think of all of those poor buggy whip manufacturers who had their jobs eliminated when the automobile was first introduced. We should ban it .. oh wait ...
Did I miss the part where buggy whip manufacturers in the US went under due to globalization moving production overseas?
The buggy went away because automobiles replaced them, which gave buggy whip manufacturers something else to make. So I have no problem with new tech replacing older tech, there's still work for people to do. However, sending the current tech work offshore does not create new opportunities for the locals. I perceive this as a problem.
That being said, my only goal in this post was to highlight the difference between technologies becoming obsolete (and replaced by a newer technology) versus technologies (at least, their production) being shipped out of a given country.
Agreed -- why can they not MOTIVATE us instead?
:(
No, they need to verbize another noun when there was a perfectly good word in the language that means *exactly* what they want. feh.
I disagree. My understanding is that a person might be motivated by carrot (something good that you want), stick (something negative that you want to avoid), or a combination of these. To incentivize is to motivate with the carrot alone and NOT the stick.
Very different in my opinion, but I work in an office and maybe my brain just works that way now
And I find that attitude very strange. I find advertisements almost universally offensive. If I want to buy something, I will do my own research.. preferably from unbiased sources.
That's fair; personally I find many commercials funny, or striking in some way. I don't use a commercial to tell me what to buy or how to live; it's a 30 second clip which might amuse or entertain. And those, I like to see and share with friends.
I don't give a crap what Tivo does because I will continue to use open source solutions such as MythTV which are not beholden in any way to the whims of advertisers and broadcasters (barring draconian legislation and enforcement, of course).
I think your point of view is extreme, but that is your right. In a sense, all of broadcast television is beholden in some way(s) to the whims of advertisers and/or broadcasters. To truly be free of that you'd need to shun all broadcast media. Personally, I'm not willing to do that. I have 2 DirecTivo's that give me what I want from broadcast TV: timeshifting, buffering, subscription, and favorites.
Meaningless PR babble as far as I am concerned. The proof is in the pudding, as they say.
The article links back to a story where there's a better description of what's been launched... Sure, anything can change in the unknown future, but I'd say there is some pudding. And to me it looks delicious. Link
I really wish this one detail was in the summary: Tivo is not talking about forcing you to watch commercials. They are talking about targeted opt-in advertising FROM THE TIVO MENU. So you have to specifically go there to watch them, they will not just pop in during your TV stream.
From the article:
'"The consumer is in charge and we need to respect that," said Kent. "Our consumer satisfaction rate is very high and if you respect that and remember that they're the ones who decide, not the networks, not the advertiser and not us, TiVo, then they actually will interact with your advertising on their own time."
What I really like about Kent's statement is that it emphasizes TiVo's use of opt in advertising. If you don't want to interact with the ads, you don't have too. It's up to the advertisers to give you a reason to be there.'
From the article:
'"The consumer is in charge and we need to respect that," said Kent. "Our consumer satisfaction rate is very high and if you respect that and remember that they're the ones who decide, not the networks, not the advertiser and not us, TiVo, then they actually will interact with your advertising on their own time."
What I really like about Kent's statement is that it emphasizes TiVo's use of opt in advertising. If you don't want to interact with the ads, you don't have too. It's up to the advertisers to give you a reason to be there.'
Tivo is not forcing you to watch commercials during your show. This is about the longer advertisements which are accessible from the Tivo menu. YOU HAVE TO CHOOSE TO GO WATCH THE COMMERCIAL. I just wanted to clear that up for everyone talking about how they watch "live TV" about 20 minutes delayed to skip the commercials. The article is not about that, Tivo's business model is not changing to be about that. This is about opt-in commercials from the Tivo menu.
With that out of the way, I personally would like to subscribe, or somehow express interest in, regular commercials. I would like them saved in the same way as the longer ads, ie in the Tivo menu. So when I see a high-quality commercial that I want to show my friends, I don't have to record several shows hoping to catch it, I can just request it.
You do know the difference between a thread and a process, right?
That's not my assertion at all. Here's the statement in question:
IMHO the LSB only has as much value as you place in the linux kernel gaining popularity on the desktop. If that's not a concern for you then the LSB has no value.
Restated: My opinion is that the LSB will help the linux kernel gain popularity on the desktop.
I agree with your statement that the LSB is not required for wdespread adoption of Linux on the desktop. But I also feel that the fragmentary nature of linux distros will slow this widespread adoption, and I feel that the LSB speaks to that and mitigates the "problem" somewhat.
Again, many (most?) hardcore linux users could care less if there were widespread adoption of linux on the desktop. Personally I'd like to see more of it, and the LSB (or something like it, with a well thought-out and well-executed test suite) would help with that.
All my opinion, hey, maybe I'm dead wrong.
I agree with the grandparent here; the testing suite having bugs SAYS NOTHING about whether the LSB should exist in the first place. It only says that the suite needs better oversight, code review, something.
IMHO the LSB only has as much value as you place in the linux kernel gaining popularity on the desktop. If that's not a concern for you then the LSB has no value. I'd personally like to see more Linux installs on desktops.
It's on the last page, where a person would expect the number 1 most anticipated game to be :)
Releasing soon for PC, out for months already on PS2
Envy went into the VisualAge series. Note that Eclipse is NOT the latest version of VisualAge; Eclipse doesn't use the envy repository (it uses CVS instead).
:(
I've used both, and I much prefer VisualAge. The IDE is bound to the JVM (bad), but the environment allows you to work in an object-oriented way; I can pull out a class and work with it. I can pull out a method and look at that. In Eclipse, everything is file-based; to work with a method, the IDE just scrolls to the right place in the text file
Also, the VisualAge debugger was 1000X better than Eclipse. Try step-through debugging with both. Try dropping to a selected frame in the execution stack rather than restarting your app from the beginning.
Just wanted to clarify that Ecipse isn't really the next iteration of VisualAge; it's a replacement product which is getting better every release.
What model do you suggest to replace the "multi-layered managerial system"? At large companies like Ford, I think that it's not a question of not wanting to dirty one's hands, but how does a CEO run a company with a few hundred thousand employees in a flat managerial hierarchy? Those management levels are in place not because he doesn't want to get in the "trenches", but because there aren't enough hours in the day.
A CEO (or whatever you call the top person) must trust the lower level managers; the alternatives are micromanagement of each tier, or fire all managers and have EVERYONE report directly to the top person.
Now, highly paid executives probably DON'T want to get their hands dirty, but that doesn't mean they are shirking responsibility. Again, flatter hierarchies can work, depending on the size of the corporation, but what do you do for the really huge ones?