> And when I think about it, what do I care if there is a gay cure app? I'm not planning on buying it.
The same could be said of porn apps. Apple is interested in keeping the App Store a "wholesome" and "family-friendly" environment. According to current social norms, that means no porn, and no bigotry. That level of control is cloying to some, and refreshing to others.
If you want an open cesspit to rummage through for apps, you have Android.
The guy is English, so the IRS obviously wouldn't be involved. However, I wonder if the British government takes its tax evasion seriously? This would be a great way to have the last laugh on this wanker.
The whole point of the T.S. Eliot quote is that there is no such thing as a "unique creative work". It's all derivative at one level or another. Way to miss the point there...
What the hell are you talking about? The Gamecube is a close second to the XBox in pure graphical horsepower. Compare any cross-platform game between the three consoles and the XBox and Gamecube versions always come out on top graphically.
Cats that are overfed will bring you "treats." Cats that are kept slightly hungry all the time would never bother to share with you, which is just what we're hoping for, right?
People always complain about how aloof cats are. Just don't overfeed them. Believe me they'll be REALLY happy to see you when you get home.
If by "run" you mean "slowly drudge through." Who's kidding who here? I use an Athlon system running WinXP and a new G4 iMac Superdrive all the time. The UI response times aren't in the same ballpark. MP3 encoding isn't even close. True, I love using my Mac, but let's not pull the wool over our own eyes! OS X was a big step up, and we're just now starting to see systems that run it adequately.
Your point about there always being marketing is somewhat true. But, I think this trend really kicked into high gear with the original release of Star Wars. Kids will naturally want to play with toys from a series they enjoy, but this line
Those who originated this line of critism, and those who continue to use it, in truth just don't like anything they did not grow up with, and they flounder around looking for excuses to validate their opinions.
is obviously wrong. Good is good is good. I didn't grow up with anime. I didn't grow up with Tex Avery. In fact I remember liking the Transformers and the Thundercats as a kid, but can't watch them anymore. So what does this show? A good cartoon appeals to adults & to children, and is timeless, and that takes real skill to do. The number of folks doing it well hasn't grown all that significantly, and these days they make movies, not TV shows.
They ask you who you are and where you're going--and, AFAIK, it's a misdemanor to not tell them who you are.
Ever hear of your Miranda rights?!? Free of speech means freedom NOT to speak as well.
OTOH, if they BRING CHARGES against me, I get to know everything that they know about me. This is a constitutionally protected right, and the PATRIOT act can't touch it.
Unless you're a terrorist, and as such an enemy combatant... whether or not you're a US citizen.
You seem to be completely ignorant of how this process works in the journalism industry. The practice of sending out pre-release, free product has been around for decades, if not longer. In the print industry, profit margins are so low that most companies wouldn't have the money to review every product their readers would be interested in. Can you imagine how much the various car mags would have to spend? My understanding is that the profit situation online is even worse than in print, so I don't see how anything would be different.
Which only begins to point out what a fucking stupid premise the whole movie is to begin with. Don't get me wrong, I loved the action sequences. It's a very pretty piece of film, but... I'm so sick of the terrible, TERRIBLE stories in movies these days. Of all the action movies that come out in a given year, maybe one of them has a decent plot not ridden with holes.
So now we'll get two more movies which build on the rickety foundation of the first. Sorry, I think I'll pass. Rentals at best.
Um, USB was brought to market and standardized largely by Apple. You could [buy] a mac with USB ports off the shelf probably 2 years before you could find it built into a new PC.
This is flat-out wrong. USB ports were included on PCs years before the iMac came out. There just wasn't any OS support for them until Win98 came out. People, please check your facts before posting something as if it is fact.
This is incorrect. The Apple ROMs you're referring to haven't been used in a long time, like more than 5 years. All modern Macs use Open Firmware. This is exactly why people are asking about do-it-yourself Macs so often. It's now possible.
Re:I turned down a well paying job at Walgreens
on
Suit Up Or Ship Out?
·
· Score: 1
Insisting that you'll not work where you can't be scruffy informs the world "I have no self-respect, so no need for you to respect me either". Whether that's fact or not is irrelevant -- it IS how others will interpret it, and will treat you accordingly.
Could this post be more overly melodramatic? There is a difference between insisting on being "scruffy" and not wanting to dress in formal-wear when going to work day-to-day. I was just talking to a friend who works at a job that requires dress shoes, nice slacks, button down shirt, tie and sport jacket. He's an EE for jebus' sake! He's working at a design bench where a tie has a startlingly small chance of making it through the week. I can understand management wanting people to dress "professionally" in situations involving clients, but otherwise, what's so wrong with some khakis and crew-neck or something? Lighten up! If people's self-esteem is based on their clothes, as you seem to imply it should be, then they have more things to worry about than just finding a job.
There have been studies and surveys done of people who work at home, and the general conclusion was that those who put themselves on a schedule and "dress for work" are more productive, and more likely to succeed, than those who think it's okay to work in their pajamas just because no one can tell them not to.
Linkage? Any hard fact to back up your statement here? I agree, in that I think people are more productive when they have self-discipline. How that correlates to "not wearing pajamas" is where you lose me.
Just because you hate them doesn't give you the right to republish their articles. The NYT doesn't HAVE to provide free, online versions of their articles, but they do, so have some decency, and do the free reg. if you want to read their stuff.
You're forgetting that Netscape Navigator was also, for all practical purposes, free... There were also other completely free web browsers on the market at the time.
Yes, Netscape was free in terms of $$$, but users in a lot of cases had to download and install it themselves, so MS's solution was to bundle it with the OS. That way people wouldn't bother to download and install Navigator or Communicator. This was the central issue of the anti-trust trial. Where have you been? Also, can we STOP perpetuating this myth that IE is free! Just because we don't pay for it directly doesn't mean it costs nothing.
No, they dont' get wages. They get advances against sales, which must be paid back to the record companies.
Many people (e.g. sound engineers & studio musicians) working for the recording companies do get paid a salary or a wage plus benefits as per the usually setup, and guess what? we don't hear them complaining.
no, if you pay with a real credit card (not an ATM/debit card) then you can always call your credit company, tell them "I returned that product it was defective" and challenge the credit on your account, they must give you your money back. It's the law. At least until the dispute is resolved.
My favorite quote from Ebert's review goes a long way to explaining martial arts movies in general...
"Maybe one of the differences between a good martial arts movie, and one that is merely technically competent, is that in the good ones, the characters have a motivation, and in the others, life is just a competitive sport." --Roger Ebert
Ahah! Your explanation helps. I was completely confused about the ending, and it still doesn't work, but at least I get the idea of what they were going for.
The problems with this idea are many-fold. (1)The primates on the ship were chimps, not apes. (2)Why do none of the land masses on that planet resemble anything like those of Earth? (I looked carefully, because I immediately suspected the planet would be Earth again).
The ending was totally predictable! As soon as he crashed near the Lincoln monument, I said "It's going to be an ape statue." Blah.
You use "Socialist" like it's a dirty word. Britain is socialist. Canada is socialist. Russia is socialist. So what?
the idea that a person is not the sole owner of, and controlling authority regarding the product of their work is as socialist as can be. 'public interest' superceding individual rights when it comes to one's labor is common practice in places like Turkey and China
So what you're saying is that if someone invented a cure for a disease that was wiping out the population, they should be able to charge whatever they want for the vaccine? I'm sorry, but that's just stupid. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. Trying to legislate around this just causes everyone a lot of grief.
I do believe that 'fair use' laws, as a general concept, are good - the freedom to lend a copy of some form of communication to a friend, or even record a copy for them. but to say that because you create something and publish it, that it becomes fair game, is a counter-incentive to creative work. what's more, it's a total disrespect for the effort of the author. one of the key reasons for america's unparalleled success in most arenas is that people are rewarded for their work, they are recognized and they benefit from their effort. this encourages them to continue to produce.
It sounds like you know a little about the ideas behind copyright, but you come to wrong conclusions. Read this: http://yarchive.net/macaulay/copyright.html
Basically, Fair Use is a balancing of free speach and the commercial incentive to creative endeavors. To say that becoming "fair game, is a counter-incentive to creative work," does nothing but restate the original argument. And the original ideal of Free Speach still stands.
The music that's "freely available on the airwaves" is there because of eminent domain. Compulsory licenses are what got commercial radio started. And compulsory licenses were brought up as an option quite often in the Napster hearings. Don't diss what you don't know about.
Slashdot Mirror
> And when I think about it, what do I care if there is a gay cure app? I'm not planning on buying it.
The same could be said of porn apps. Apple is interested in keeping the App Store a "wholesome" and "family-friendly" environment. According to current social norms, that means no porn, and no bigotry. That level of control is cloying to some, and refreshing to others.
If you want an open cesspit to rummage through for apps, you have Android.
I'm pretty sure the Greeks thought pottery was for porn...
The guy is English, so the IRS obviously wouldn't be involved. However, I wonder if the British government takes its tax evasion seriously? This would be a great way to have the last laugh on this wanker.
The whole point of the T.S. Eliot quote is that there is no such thing as a "unique creative work". It's all derivative at one level or another. Way to miss the point there...
What the hell are you talking about? The Gamecube is a close second to the XBox in pure graphical horsepower. Compare any cross-platform game between the three consoles and the XBox and Gamecube versions always come out on top graphically.
Cats that are overfed will bring you "treats." Cats that are kept slightly hungry all the time would never bother to share with you, which is just what we're hoping for, right? People always complain about how aloof cats are. Just don't overfeed them. Believe me they'll be REALLY happy to see you when you get home.
If by "run" you mean "slowly drudge through." Who's kidding who here? I use an Athlon system running WinXP and a new G4 iMac Superdrive all the time. The UI response times aren't in the same ballpark. MP3 encoding isn't even close. True, I love using my Mac, but let's not pull the wool over our own eyes! OS X was a big step up, and we're just now starting to see systems that run it adequately.
You seem to be completely ignorant of how this process works in the journalism industry. The practice of sending out pre-release, free product has been around for decades, if not longer. In the print industry, profit margins are so low that most companies wouldn't have the money to review every product their readers would be interested in. Can you imagine how much the various car mags would have to spend? My understanding is that the profit situation online is even worse than in print, so I don't see how anything would be different.
Which only begins to point out what a fucking stupid premise the whole movie is to begin with. Don't get me wrong, I loved the action sequences. It's a very pretty piece of film, but... I'm so sick of the terrible, TERRIBLE stories in movies these days. Of all the action movies that come out in a given year, maybe one of them has a decent plot not ridden with holes. So now we'll get two more movies which build on the rickety foundation of the first. Sorry, I think I'll pass. Rentals at best.
This is incorrect. The Apple ROMs you're referring to haven't been used in a long time, like more than 5 years. All modern Macs use Open Firmware. This is exactly why people are asking about do-it-yourself Macs so often. It's now possible.
The more I think about it, the more the symbolism of this is frighteningly perfect.
Just because you hate them doesn't give you the right to republish their articles. The NYT doesn't HAVE to provide free, online versions of their articles, but they do, so have some decency, and do the free reg. if you want to read their stuff.
How many times does it need to be said? You cannot patent an idea! Only a method of implementing that idea... Big difference.
No, they dont' get wages. They get advances against sales, which must be paid back to the record companies. Many people (e.g. sound engineers & studio musicians) working for the recording companies do get paid a salary or a wage plus benefits as per the usually setup, and guess what? we don't hear them complaining.
no, if you pay with a real credit card (not an ATM/debit card) then you can always call your credit company, tell them "I returned that product it was defective" and challenge the credit on your account, they must give you your money back. It's the law. At least until the dispute is resolved.
My favorite quote from Ebert's review goes a long way to explaining martial arts movies in general... "Maybe one of the differences between a good martial arts movie, and one that is merely technically competent, is that in the good ones, the characters have a motivation, and in the others, life is just a competitive sport." --Roger Ebert
Ahah! Your explanation helps. I was completely confused about the ending, and it still doesn't work, but at least I get the idea of what they were going for.
The problems with this idea are many-fold. (1)The primates on the ship were chimps, not apes. (2)Why do none of the land masses on that planet resemble anything like those of Earth? (I looked carefully, because I immediately suspected the planet would be Earth again).
The ending was totally predictable! As soon as he crashed near the Lincoln monument, I said "It's going to be an ape statue." Blah.
You use "Socialist" like it's a dirty word. Britain is socialist. Canada is socialist. Russia is socialist. So what?
So what you're saying is that if someone invented a cure for a disease that was wiping out the population, they should be able to charge whatever they want for the vaccine? I'm sorry, but that's just stupid. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. Trying to legislate around this just causes everyone a lot of grief.
It sounds like you know a little about the ideas behind copyright, but you come to wrong conclusions. Read this: http://yarchive.net/macaulay/copyright.html
Basically, Fair Use is a balancing of free speach and the commercial incentive to creative endeavors. To say that becoming "fair game, is a counter-incentive to creative work," does nothing but restate the original argument. And the original ideal of Free Speach still stands.
The music that's "freely available on the airwaves" is there because of eminent domain. Compulsory licenses are what got commercial radio started. And compulsory licenses were brought up as an option quite often in the Napster hearings. Don't diss what you don't know about.