"certain academic criteria" to be exclusive of the poor.
no, but Outstanding Public Education is definitely NOT exclusive to the poor (or even inclusive). America's education system is much like it's health care (please no wars), they are great if you have money and don't exist if you don't.
Most likely that vendor doesn't have a volume licensing deal and has to pay full retail.
The extra ~$100 dollars is a service charge for finding the right hardware and installing the OS, not trivial for laptops in Linux (try picking up a random lappy and get Linux up on it).
I would be curious to know how much extra service comes with the box, though.
just so long as it doesn't try to do anything funny, like send MS a list of all my files, or what I'm reading etc...
from the article..
Within the next six to nine months, Microsoft plans to roll out a version of DRM that will enable consumers to manipulate and back up their own licence stores of video and music clips. But Boudreau said that the software giant has yet to decide whether users will do this themselves or whether it will be kept on a secure site.
not only can they track what you watch, but they want to make sure you only watch specially "licensed" media. DRM + SDMI, and you thought you owned the bits you bought...
I used it the other day and it worked fine. The quality isn't great, but I'd say it compares well with most digital phones. It's using the same network. There was about a.5 second speed of light delay, but, heh, for free you can't complain.
I want it to be 16-way or better, yet I don't want to be able to fry eggs on it, and I don't want it to have enough fans to achieve liftoff.
This is interesting, and something I hadn't really thought about. 16-way home processors. Sometimes I forget how much more powerful the machine I'm typing on is that the one I used just 8 years ago (386-16). Moore's law is fun.
More details about a new mobile processor that a whole lotta folks (outside/.) seem to think is pretty neat?
and why not use linux, I mean, linus, to promote your product. You have an icon working for you. I don't know why we didn't see him during the Superbowl.
Maybe a slow crawling forward over the shoulder shot of Linux playing q3a on a Tmeta box. He glances over his shoulder, acts surprised, hits a special key combo and gets back to kernel hacking. Fade to Tmeta logo. Tagline, um, "Linus likes it." with www.transmeta.com floating around there somewhere. If geeks could market, linux would be in a lot better shape.
Are they breaking them because they think they're injust? Hardly.
*bzzt*, I knowingly break them because they are unjust. Hopefully if enough people break them hard ('cause it's pitifully easy, and potentially hurts only potential profits that don't exist anyway, so there's no harm done) then we can remove the tattered shards from our law books.
They're breaking them because they don't *WANT* to pay for the CD.
*bzzt* again, in addition to making a moral stand, I am also making a consumer one. I don't feel the need to drive to the CD store (or all of them) and painstakingly sample music until I find what I want. I do like three clicks and music though. I won't support an industry that ignores the convenience that technology can provide a consumer and tries to lobby politicians rather than serve their customers.
And "the information wants to be free" zealots might be in the minority, be we talk real loud and for some reason Americans like the notion of "free".
In discussing this topic with "regualr people" (those folks who don't live and breath tech) I've found general support for the people and very little for the MPA(A).
What, IYHO, is the general reception you have felt about this issue? Have you been able to explain your position and have it understood? What are some of the stranger assumptions you have come up against?
Re:No one needs to profit from distribution.
on
China and the MPA
·
· Score: 2
I agree, I don't see the need to pay a distributor for anything (and that includes their promotion budget). I can go get the media myself, thank you very much. Unfortunately, a number of businesses have spent a long time and a lump of cash to control those (very-profitable) distribution chains and don't want this whole Internet thing stepping on their toes. Roll with the market or get rolled by it, that's my HO.
it's not a matter of just playing but a matter of degree. There is a difference in playing with some buds and watching the best players in the world do it right. Both can be very enjoyable and you try not to have to pick between them (i.e., play your own game at halftime.)
I wonder how many Slashdotters care (or don't) about the superbowl, other than the great ads..
1 here, now I have to wait another 8 months before I get more football:( BTW, that was one of the best Superbowls in history, played nearly flawlessly. No turnovers, few penalties, a great comeback, and the final score decided by less than a foot. Football is a game of inches, after an entire season and a Cinderella playoff story (with that lateral vs. Buffalo), the most prestigous trophy in American sport comes down to the length of a football.
This is just a chance for a bunch of bitter folks to sound off. They vast majority of them know as much about the enjoymnet of watching or playing football as your average offensive lineman knows about coding perl and kernel hacking. For a group that decries marginalizing people and touts inclusion and community, it's kinda funny to watch them turn on someone else and get public support. What beasts.
Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech
Now, IANAL ANWTB, nor am I a sitting judge or have experience interpreting 200 year old declarations. However, as a limiting of speech issue, I think this could fit. It could be argued convincingly that the University is abridging this right by requiring students to pay for something that is already offered as a free service using one of the other services they have already purchased. By controlling access to free (beer) speech, it could be argued that they are limiting the *freedom* of speech.
Of course, if the students agreed (After thouroughly reading, I'm sure) to be regulated, (against their best interests) then they have no leg to stand on. And I doubt that Clemson has to follow the same rules as Congress, so the constitutionality of this action in this context is probably not an issue.
I just don't like seeing Internet Providers try to dictate what traffic their paying customers use (outside of spam, and it's ilk). I also don't like seeing captive audiences forced to use passe technology when new, cheaper, and generally better solutions exists, especially with such an obvious profit motive. THe school should be trying to provide the best situation for its students, not trying to squeeze them for every extra penny.
So while it may be Constitutional is this context, it definitely wouldn't be in another, and regardless of either context it can't be defended morally or ethically.
yes it does, it's called winntcfg (IIRC) and is in the Resource pack (or whatever they called the pack of useful stuff that costs extra), although you can find it on the 'net with a bit of googling.
The university provides certain services to its students for a fee.
You mean like Internet access? For a fee, right?
People here seem to believe that the world owes them something -- that unlimited internet access is a basic right, which should be provided free to everyone by "them."
I've seen this lament a number of times, and it's crap. This isn't about unlimited Internet access, it's not even about the bandwidth load. Simple reloading this/. page is worth about 5 minutes of phone time. The students paid for thier connection, and while I agree that perhaps there should be limits on the total bandwidth used per individual, I don't like to see selective enforcement of what are "good" and "bad" IP packets.
The simple fact is that the University is trying to snuff a service that acts in an extremely competitive way (free long distance) with a service that the University gets paid a lot of money to offer through an outside company.
I you feel Universities have a greater olbigation to their business partners than their students (who also pay money to attend school), then by all means support the university in their censorship. Help set precedents that limit consumber choice to whatever the hell they are told to choose. Break the people's will so when their ISP says "No you can't visit that site, it's a competitor of ours, Read clause #12563b of your Contract and bend over", it's taken as a matter of course.
so forcing people to pay for a service that they can get for free by censoring websites is constitutional? Somehow I seriously doubt that.
That's like saying "We will no longer allow people to bath in the river that runs through campus, you must now all pay to use the community showers, thank you." If anyone isn't outraged by this, I just don't see your position.
And I don't see why you need the redundancy of a T3 and $.11/min phone service. One of those makes the other a raw deal.
Umm, seems to me that web access and free long-distance are the same thing. I just went to dialpad.com (in win) and called my mom after about 3 minutes of registering and two java applets. We talked for a half hour free and I'll be using it quite a bit since I didn't feel like plunking down a $200 long distance despostic with my local desp^H^H^HHprovider. It's called Voice over IP (VoIP). Voice only takes about 8kbs for good quality so any concerns over waste of bandwidth are a joke.
What they are doing amounts to censorship. "You cannot go to this website because we offer a competing service." This is wrong and should not be tolerated.
Of course not, negative stories about Linux don't get posted here.
of course they do, you just did it. And if you'd taken the time to add tags, even the really lazy people would see that all new OSes will have bugs, ofttimes catastrophic ones.
'course I'm on your side for this one, the editorial comments on the headline for this story are horrendous.
Slashdot Mirror
"certain academic criteria" to be exclusive of the poor.
no, but Outstanding Public Education is definitely NOT exclusive to the poor (or even inclusive). America's education system is much like it's health care (please no wars), they are great if you have money and don't exist if you don't.
Most likely that vendor doesn't have a volume licensing deal and has to pay full retail.
The extra ~$100 dollars is a service charge for finding the right hardware and installing the OS, not trivial for laptops in Linux (try picking up a random lappy and get Linux up on it).
I would be curious to know how much extra service comes with the box, though.
just so long as it doesn't try to do anything funny, like send MS a list of all my files, or what I'm reading etc...
from the article..
Within the next six to nine months, Microsoft plans to roll out a version of DRM that will enable consumers to manipulate and back up their own licence stores of video and music clips. But Boudreau said that the software giant has yet to decide whether users will do this themselves or whether it will be kept on a secure site.
not only can they track what you watch, but they want to make sure you only watch specially "licensed" media. DRM + SDMI, and you thought you owned the bits you bought...
and language translation service
Give a man a babelfish, he understands for a day. GPL the babelfish, then embed it, and he gets a real cool palm app next year.
(Note: the letters GPL do not appear in the article, nor is app a real word)
I used it the other day and it worked fine. The quality isn't great, but I'd say it compares well with most digital phones. It's using the same network. There was about a .5 second speed of light delay, but, heh, for free you can't complain.
I want it to be 16-way or better, yet I don't want to be able to fry eggs on it, and I don't want it to have enough fans to achieve liftoff.
This is interesting, and something I hadn't really thought about. 16-way home processors. Sometimes I forget how much more powerful the machine I'm typing on is that the one I used just 8 years ago (386-16). Moore's law is fun.
(begin thread entitled "Back in my day...")
You're a part of the trolling guild, eh?
um, what?
/.) seem to think is pretty neat?
More details about a new mobile processor that a whole lotta folks (outside
and why not use linux, I mean, linus, to promote your product. You have an icon working for you. I don't know why we didn't see him during the Superbowl.
Maybe a slow crawling forward over the shoulder shot of Linux playing q3a on a Tmeta box. He glances over his shoulder, acts surprised, hits a special key combo and gets back to kernel hacking.
Fade to Tmeta logo. Tagline, um, "Linus likes it." with www.transmeta.com floating around there somewhere. If geeks could market, linux would be in a lot better shape.
Oh, for that go here
Even includes pictures of microscopic interstellar life, err, rock.
( Beta is only a state of mind )
What? That he's a dipshit? Deeeep, man.
Are they breaking them because they think they're injust? Hardly.
*bzzt*, I knowingly break them because they are unjust. Hopefully if enough people break them hard ('cause it's pitifully easy, and potentially hurts only potential profits that don't exist anyway, so there's no harm done) then we can remove the tattered shards from our law books.
They're breaking them because they don't *WANT* to pay for the CD.
*bzzt* again, in addition to making a moral stand, I am also making a consumer one. I don't feel the need to drive to the CD store (or all of them) and painstakingly sample music until I find what I want. I do like three clicks and music though. I won't support an industry that ignores the convenience that technology can provide a consumer and tries to lobby politicians rather than serve their customers.
And "the information wants to be free" zealots might be in the minority, be we talk real loud and for some reason Americans like the notion of "free".
In discussing this topic with "regualr people" (those folks who don't live and breath tech) I've found general support for the people and very little for the MPA(A).
What, IYHO, is the general reception you have felt about this issue? Have you been able to explain your position and have it understood? What are some of the stranger assumptions you have come up against?
I agree, I don't see the need to pay a distributor for anything (and that includes their promotion budget). I can go get the media myself, thank you very much. Unfortunately, a number of businesses have spent a long time and a lump of cash to control those (very-profitable) distribution chains and don't want this whole Internet thing stepping on their toes. Roll with the market or get rolled by it, that's my HO.
you're friends aren't in the minority, people who don't understand a situation, yet decry it, they (thankfully) are in the minority.
it's not a matter of just playing but a matter of degree. There is a difference in playing with some buds and watching the best players in the world do it right. Both can be very enjoyable and you try not to have to pick between them (i.e., play your own game at halftime.)
I wonder how many Slashdotters care (or don't) about the superbowl, other than the great ads..
:( BTW, that was one of the best Superbowls in history, played nearly flawlessly. No turnovers, few penalties, a great comeback, and the final score decided by less than a foot. Football is a game of inches, after an entire season and a Cinderella playoff story (with that lateral vs. Buffalo), the most prestigous trophy in American sport comes down to the length of a football.
1 here, now I have to wait another 8 months before I get more football
This is just a chance for a bunch of bitter folks to sound off. They vast majority of them know as much about the enjoymnet of watching or playing football as your average offensive lineman knows about coding perl and kernel hacking. For a group that decries marginalizing people and touts inclusion and community, it's kinda funny to watch them turn on someone else and get public support. What beasts.
Somehow I seriously doubt that you have ever read any part of the Constitution or the Bill of Rights.
/. addiction)
Somehow I seriously doubt you have any idea of my reading habits, or any habits, whatsoever. (outside the
from this site
Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech
Now, IANAL ANWTB, nor am I a sitting judge or have experience interpreting 200 year old declarations. However, as a limiting of speech issue, I think this could fit. It could be argued convincingly that the University is abridging this right by requiring students to pay for something that is already offered as a free service using one of the other services they have already purchased. By controlling access to free (beer) speech, it could be argued that they are limiting the *freedom* of speech.
Of course, if the students agreed (After thouroughly reading, I'm sure) to be regulated, (against their best interests) then they have no leg to stand on. And I doubt that Clemson has to follow the same rules as Congress, so the constitutionality of this action in this context is probably not an issue.
I just don't like seeing Internet Providers try to dictate what traffic their paying customers use (outside of spam, and it's ilk). I also don't like seeing captive audiences forced to use passe technology when new, cheaper, and generally better solutions exists, especially with such an obvious profit motive. THe school should be trying to provide the best situation for its students, not trying to squeeze them for every extra penny.
So while it may be Constitutional is this context, it definitely wouldn't be in another, and regardless of either context it can't be defended morally or ethically.
winipcfg does not exist on NT,
yes it does, it's called winntcfg (IIRC) and is in the Resource pack (or whatever they called the pack of useful stuff that costs extra), although you can find it on the 'net with a bit of googling.
The university provides certain services to its students for a fee.
/. page is worth about 5 minutes of phone time. The students paid for thier connection, and while I agree that perhaps there should be limits on the total bandwidth used per individual, I don't like to see selective enforcement of what are "good" and "bad" IP packets.
You mean like Internet access? For a fee, right?
People here seem to believe that the world owes them something -- that unlimited internet access is a basic right, which should be provided free to everyone by "them."
I've seen this lament a number of times, and it's crap. This isn't about unlimited Internet access, it's not even about the bandwidth load. Simple reloading this
The simple fact is that the University is trying to snuff a service that acts in an extremely competitive way (free long distance) with a service that the University gets paid a lot of money to offer through an outside company.
I you feel Universities have a greater olbigation to their business partners than their students (who also pay money to attend school), then by all means support the university in their censorship. Help set precedents that limit consumber choice to whatever the hell they are told to choose. Break the people's will so when their ISP says "No you can't visit that site, it's a competitor of ours, Read clause #12563b of your Contract and bend over", it's taken as a matter of course.
so forcing people to pay for a service that they can get for free by censoring websites is constitutional? Somehow I seriously doubt that.
That's like saying "We will no longer allow people to bath in the river that runs through campus, you must now all pay to use the community showers, thank you." If anyone isn't outraged by this, I just don't see your position.
And I don't see why you need the redundancy of a T3 and $.11/min phone service. One of those makes the other a raw deal.
Umm, seems to me that web access and free long-distance are the same thing. I just went to dialpad.com (in win) and called my mom after about 3 minutes of registering and two java applets. We talked for a half hour free and I'll be using it quite a bit since I didn't feel like plunking down a $200 long distance despostic with my local desp^H^H^HHprovider. It's called Voice over IP (VoIP). Voice only takes about 8kbs for good quality so any concerns over waste of bandwidth are a joke.
What they are doing amounts to censorship. "You cannot go to this website because we offer a competing service." This is wrong and should not be tolerated.
no
Of course not, negative stories about Linux don't get posted here.
of course they do, you just did it. And if you'd taken the time to add tags, even the really lazy people would see that all new OSes will have bugs, ofttimes catastrophic ones.
'course I'm on your side for this one, the editorial comments on the headline for this story are horrendous.